On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 01:45:36PM -0500, Amit Kulkarni wrote: > Hi, > > I am replying in a single email. > > I do a fsck once in a while, not regular. In the last 6-8 months I > might have done it about 5 times. And I did it multi-user the few > times I did it, but plan on doing it single user in future and I do > plan to do it monthly. After seeing the messages when you fsck, it is > better to do it monthly. FreeBSD which is the origin of FFS does a > background fsck, and if Kirk McCusick feels so strongly I will do it > too. (I remember somebody talking about having background fsck here on > a openbsd list, but I forgot who it was).
This is completely stupid. What do you trust more ? your file system, or fsck ? oth have bugs ! I'm sure of it ! so, if you run fsck, it's likely you're going to run into fsck bugs eventually (and trying fsck on a mounted partition was really, really stupid). Whereas, if you don't run fsck, you're going to run into fs bugs eventually. Now, consider this: the fs code is very heavily tested. People use it 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Compared to THAT, the fsck code is very lightly tested. It's run only once in a while, when the power shuts down, or when you update your machines. What is more likely ? corrupting a perfectly sane filesystem by running fsck on it (which has MORE code paths to correct problems and is usually run on corrupted filesystems), or having an unseen bug in the fs code that affects only you and that fsck would be able to see ?
