[ale] fsck opinions

[James Sumners]

Journaling has everything to do with file system integrity. The point
of a file system supporting journals is to guard against errors due to
sudden restarts or crashes. But you're right, a journal doesn't meant
the file system will _never_ be corrupted.

I think that if you are using a journaled file system then you can get
away with trying to mount it first. If the mount fails, then do the
fsck. If the mount succeeds, verify that your data is still valid, and
do a fsck during the next available down time.

In regard to a fsck taking hours, has anyone had that problem with
JFS? I use JFS on my partitions/drives where I store a lot of large
files (e.g. my DVR), and I have never had a fsck on them take longer
than 2 seconds.

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Randy Ramsdell <rramsdell at activedg.com> wrote:
> Journaling does not have anything to do with file system integrity.
> However not sure why to do fsck on every reboot. If data integrity is
> the top concern then fsck on reboot.



-- 
James Sumners
http://james.roomfullofmirrors.com/

"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts
pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it
is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become
drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted."

Missionaria Protectiva, Text QIV (decto)
CH:D 59