dangerous situation with shutdown process

[Matthias Buelow]

Paul Mather wrote:

>on reboot.  (Actually, what I find to be more inconvenient is the
>resynchronisation time needed for my geom_mirror, which takes a lot
>longer than a fsck.)  I understand that fsck delays for large file
>systems is the major impetus behind the journalling work, not as a fix
>for a perceived data consistency problem.

Well... I have lost a few (ca. 3) UFS filesystems due to power loss
or a kernel crash in the past but interestingly those were all on
SCSI (and in the pre-softupdates era, so mounted with sync metadata
updates, where this Shouldn't Happen[tm] either..) I've also seen
ext2fs (which doesn't have safeguards against fs corruption) on
Linux zapped often by power loss and haven't seen a statistically
higher number of corrupted ext2fs than ufs.  So the whole thing is
a bit hard to quantify. However, I'm all for reducing the possibility
of corruption when it could be done, programmatically.

mkb.