On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 08:35:16PM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi
>
> > > The background fsck capability, just like journalling or logging, are
> > > typically only in needed in 24/7 systems (sure, they are nice to have in
> > > your home system, but do you _REALLY_ need them? i don't!) and those
> > > system typically are run on proven hardware which is operated well
> > > within the specs. So please don't construct these kinds of arguments.
> >
> > You can already do background fsck on a linux system today. Just do it on
> > a LVM/EVMS snapshot.
>
> How do you fix errors you find by such background fsck?
You umount the file system (that is the best you can do with a random
error anyways, BSD doesn't do any better except in the special case
of lost blocks in the bitmap) and fsck it again on the real volume.
In theory you could build a mechanism to pass some state from the
first fsck to the second to speed the second up, but it is probably not
worth it.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:25 EST