Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:44:51 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: RW <list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gbde: ufs & ffs Message-ID: <43446.1101213891@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:39:33 GMT." <200411231239.33577.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200411231239.33577.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com>, RW writes: > >Why does the gbde section of the Handbook recommend running fsck -p -t ffs, >which calls fsck_ffs, when ordinary filesystems are checked with fsck_ufs. ufs and ffs are two sides of the same one filesystem. The difference is mainly that ufs _could_ potentially be shared with another filesystem using a different storage policy as well. Therefore, in my opinion, the correct name is FFS. >According to ><http://sixshooter.v6.thrupoint.net/jeroen/faq.html#UFS-DIFF-FFS>, ffs runs >on top of ufs "providing directory structure information, and a variety of >disk access optimizations". That is 180 degrees wrong. >Am I correct in thinking that soft-updates >protect ffs from inconsistency, so that only a background ufs check is >required? yes. >Is it possible to background check gbde partitions? If so, can it be done >after booting is complete? yes. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43446.1101213891>