Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:20:15 +0100 From: Matt Smith <fbsd@xtaz.co.uk> To: Julien Cigar <jcigar@ulb.ac.be> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Message-ID: <20151021152015.GF90075@xtaz.uk> In-Reply-To: <20151021143525.GX87605@mordor.lan> References: <867fmh12nq.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <CALfReyfg-71nCg4K0dKmUK-YmZ8yi0ppeGGv4WOD-2Mt8NP9HQ@mail.gmail.com> <86pp081glq.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <CA%2BtpaK0ezoi7wBBD9VZwREq9Qp0YaJNfJY42=tZAYi5VSL8rCA@mail.gmail.com> <20151021143525.GX87605@mordor.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 21 16:35, Julien Cigar wrote: >The main advantage of SU+J over SU is to avoid a fsck at boot if the FS >is not clean. Note that SU+J almost never worked for me and disabling >SU+J (tunefs -j disable) is the first thing I do after an installation. Agreed. I don't understand why this mode has been made the default. SU always works fine for me but SU+J always causes corrupted filesystems which it never bothers to fix either in the background or the foreground. I have to disable the journal and manually fsck it to get a clean filesystem once again. Seems completely flawed. -- Matt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20151021152015.GF90075>