Duh. I am trying to prove that fast fsck is good for everyone, not
that it's the right way to get high availability.
> For situations like that, you want completely separate hardware. On
> separate UPSen. On separate power lines. Probably in different cities.
Not necessarily. There are many ways to approach high availability.
> Dual-ported disks is not a desaster plan.
You'd be surprised how many people use them that way. However, even
with completely separate hardware in completely separate cities, you
will probably find that you will be happier if fsck is fast.
> Fsck times is just about the least important thing in that situation,
> because if that's what you're waiting for, you didn't do your homework.
You haven't listened to what I said, I suspect.
And many other people with less need for high availability still have
need for fast fsck.
Please, let's stop this pointless "discussion". You (and several
others) are arguing against a strawman. Fast fsck is good. Everyone
benefits from it.
-- g
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/