SU+J systems do not fsck themselves
David Thiel
lx at redundancy.redundancy.org
Wed Dec 28 05:14:04 UTC 2011
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 02:48:22PM -0800, Xin Li wrote:
> >> - use journalled fsck; - use normal fsck to check if the
> >> journalled fsck did the right thing.
Ok, here is the log of fsck with and without journal.
http://redundancy.redundancy.org/fscklog3
That was done the very next boot, after a clean shutdown. The errors
from the previous live fsck aren't there (oddly), but there are still
are apparently some corrections made. The next fsck still complains, but
doesn't give any salvage prompts.
Here is jsa@'s, done on a live FS with SU+J:
http://redundancy.redundancy.org/fscklog4
I'm not actually looking to solve my particular problem per se. The
issue is that almost everyone I've checked with that's running SU+J gets
unref'd file and other errors when they check their filesystem (with the
fs live). Unless I'm missing something, a running FS should never have
those kinds of errors unless you deliberately disabled fsck.
This leaves only a couple options:
- SU+J and fsck do not work correctly together to fix corruption on
boot, i.e. bgfsck isn't getting run when it should
- Stuff is getting completely screwed up after boot
- fsck is giving incorrect results
- I'm completely clueless about how SU+J is supposed to behave or be
deployed
I'm pretty certain that the first is the issue here. It would be great
if others could check their own SU+J filesystems so we could get a few
more data points.
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list