Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing - why not badblocks?

2007-09-27 Thread Vincenzo Ciancia
On 27/09/2007 Oliver Grawert wrote:
  What about my alternative suggestion? It would still run fsck, but at
   the same time be less annoying or not disturbing at all.
 not wsure if you ever ran fsck manually, but you have to unmount the
 partition you check or at least mount it readonly ...
 
 so no matter how far you will background it you wont be able to work
 while it runs ...

If the point of running that (annoying, indeed) fsck is to check for
disk defect, why not running badblocks instead? It can do a read-only
check on a mounted filesystem. You could modify that so that it runs
only when other processes are not accessing the disk. In any case,
having a journaled filesystem by default and blocking users while they
might be in a hurry is not pleasant. At least leave the possibility of
interrupting the check. Suppose you are at a conference, and it starts
checking your disk, and you start your talk late for that reason. What
will other people think about ubuntu? Is this good publicity?

Vincenzo

-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss


Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing - why not badblocks?

2007-09-27 Thread Alex Jones
I'd just like to point out that it seems to take 40 minutes to scan a
500 GB volume!

On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 11:05 +0200, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:

 On 27/09/2007 Oliver Grawert wrote:
   What about my alternative suggestion? It would still run fsck, but at
the same time be less annoying or not disturbing at all.
  not wsure if you ever ran fsck manually, but you have to unmount the
  partition you check or at least mount it readonly ...
  
  so no matter how far you will background it you wont be able to work
  while it runs ...
 
 If the point of running that (annoying, indeed) fsck is to check for
 disk defect, why not running badblocks instead? It can do a read-only
 check on a mounted filesystem. You could modify that so that it runs
 only when other processes are not accessing the disk. In any case,
 having a journaled filesystem by default and blocking users while they
 might be in a hurry is not pleasant. At least leave the possibility of
 interrupting the check. Suppose you are at a conference, and it starts
 checking your disk, and you start your talk late for that reason. What
 will other people think about ubuntu? Is this good publicity?
 
 Vincenzo
 
-- 
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss