Subject: Re: ffs question
To: None <email@example.com>
From: J Chapman Flack <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/04/2005 06:54:10
> > filesystem without fscking it. But "blocks in the free map also in files"
> > would hurt,because with further use of the fs you'd wind up with files
> > sharing blocks. Does the kernel really allow that? Is the problem that nobody
> > wants to sync-update the bitmap so frequently?
> At least with soft updates it is supposed to be "blocks in the free map
> marked as used, but not in files". That doesn't hurt badly, it is the same
Right. I was wondering about the non-softdep case, and whether it actually
has a non-innocuous "blocks in free map and in files" failure mode, and if
that could easily be avoided, or if avoiding it would be more complicated
than I'm thinking.