lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: ext3 vs resiserfs vs xfs
On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 04:00:55PM +0100, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote:
> hi
>
> What's coolest/best/worst of ext3, ReiserFS and XFS?
> I just set up a RedHat 7.2 box with ext3, and after a few tests/chrashes,
> I see no difference at all. After a chrash, it really wants to run fsck
> anyway.

It will run fsck after a crash, but the fsck simply runs the journal
on ext3 filesystems that were uncleanly mounted. So the fsck will run
very quickly, *unless* the kernel had detected some kind of filesystem
error, and had set the "the filesystem has errors" flag, in which case
the full fsck check will be run.

If you're seeing a full fsck (i.e., a run which takes over a minute
and where you see the progress bar) after a crash consistently, you
might want to check and make sure that you've really converted the
filesystem in question to ext3.....

- Ted



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [W:0.108 / U:10.856 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site