Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756004AbZKIOHO (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:07:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755966AbZKIOHO (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:07:14 -0500 Received: from THUNK.ORG ([69.25.196.29]:55084 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755942AbZKIOHM (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:07:12 -0500 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:05:55 -0500 From: Theodore Tso To: Pavel Machek Cc: david@lang.hm, Rik van Riel , Ric Wheeler , Florian Weimer , Goswin von Brederlow , Rob Landley , kernel list , Andrew Morton , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, jack@suse.cz Subject: Re: periodic fsck was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible Message-ID: <20091109140555.GG7592@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso , Pavel Machek , david@lang.hm, Rik van Riel , Ric Wheeler , Florian Weimer , Goswin von Brederlow , Rob Landley , kernel list , Andrew Morton , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, jack@suse.cz References: <20090824230036.GK29763@elf.ucw.cz> <4A932B18.1020209@redhat.com> <20090825093414.GB15563@elf.ucw.cz> <4A94ACDF.30405@redhat.com> <20090826111751.GC26595@elf.ucw.cz> <20090826131028.GB1370@ucw.cz> <20090826180248.GB6997@mit.edu> <20091109085318.GE4818@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091109085318.GE4818@elf.ucw.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1382 Lines: 30 On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 09:53:18AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Well, in SUSE11-or-so, distro stopped period fscks, silently :-(. I > believed that it was really bad idea at that point, but because I > could not find piece of documentation recommending them, I lost the > argument. It's an engineering trade-off. If you have perfect memory that is never has cosmic-ray hiccups, and hard drives that never write data to the wrong place, etc. then you don't need periodic fsck's. If you do have imperfect hardware, the question then is how imperfect your hardware is, and how frequently it introduces errors. If you check too frequently, though, users get upset, especially when it happens at the most inconvenient time (when you're trying to recover from unscheduled downtime by rebooting); if you check too infrequently then it doesn't help you too much since too much data gets damaged before fsck notices. So these days, what I strongly recommend is that people use LVM snapshots, and schedule weekly checks during some low usage period (i.e., 3am on Saturdays), using something like the e2croncheck shell script. - Ted -- 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/