On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, der Mouse wrote: [...]
The other would be to run raidframeparity earlier, before swap is started. It seems to me that each should actually be done, independent of the other, but either one would be good enough for my purposes. The former would be more intrusive as far as raidframe is concerned; I'm not sure the latter is possible, since I don't have my head around why it's run where it is now (rather than as part of raidframe).
The current logic is in place so fsck completes before any
raid parity rebuild is started, otherwise the fsck runs
just after any raid parity rebuild is started, which is going
to slow it down by some significant multiple.
--
David/absolute -- www.NetBSD.org: No hype required --