[linux-lvm] Re: About fstab and fsck
Bryn M. Reeves
bmr at redhat.com
Thu Feb 12 20:17:37 UTC 2009
Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> filesystem... so considering its size, I'd turn it off. Hopefully the
>>> "fsck takes _forever_" problem will die when btrfs becomes the
>>> standard filesystem.
>> Just a reminder: Linux has xfs since 2002. A full-blown fsck on xfs is
>> a rare thing.
> Similarly, I don't know of any case where fsck on an ext3 partition
> turned out to be useful. As a matter of fact, my home router's ext3
I wouldn't go that far. It all depends what messed the file system up
in the first place. Ext3 bugs, minor scribbling and suchlike generally
get tidied up reasonably well by e2fsck. It's quite true that with
major corruption to the file system there's often not an awful lot
left afterwards but that's true of many other file systems as well.
> partition is never fsck'd (it would take way too much time to this poor
> 266MHz thingy to fsck my 1TB filesystem).
/me wonders why a router needs a 1TB fs :-)
More information about the linux-lvm