Re: ext3 vs resiserfs vs xfs

Anton Altaparmakov (aia21@cam.ac.uk)
Wed, 07 Nov 2001 18:40:21 +0000

At 15:23 07/11/2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > 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. I've tried ReiserFS before, with no fsck after chrashes - is this
>
>Umm RH 7.2 after an unexpected shutdown will give you a 5 second count down
>when you can choose to force an fsck - ext3 doesnt need an fsck but
>sometimes folks might want to force it thats all

Hm, while still on the default RH7.2 kernel using ext3 on all partitions I
flicked the reset switch accidentally (wrong reset switch it was...) and
when coming back up it fscked (I didn't touch anything - didn't even notice
any 5 second thing but I wasn't looking at this screen) and it found two
lost inodes (I got two entries in lost and found). So it still needs to
fsck by the looks of it?

Anton

-- 
   "I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown

-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/
ICQ: 8561279 / WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/


-
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/