Idea #6948: Do filesystem check less often

Written by zooounds the 13 Apr 08 at 18:20. Category: System.
Related to: Nothing/Others. Status: New

Description

I know that you can skip this test in hardy but I still think the test is done way to often.

EXT3 is a good file system so I see no need to check the file system so often.

Users (for example Windows users) may think that Ubuntu has a bad file system you can't trust.

An option would be that the first time the file systems need checking tell the user WHY the system is checed and ask how important she think it is (like Never, Seldom, Often)

Tags: (none)

Attachments

No attachments.

Duplicates

[Report a duplicate and merge its votes to this idea]

Comments

scawa wrote on the 13 Apr 08 at 19:41

The file system check should remain mandatory. As another idea suggested the file system check should just look pretty and tell the user what is going on instead of displaying a black screen for 15 minutes.

Also what some script do now should be implemented: Ask at shutdown if on the next boot the file system shall be checked if it is due.

flip314 wrote on the 14 Apr 08 at 06:46

-1. I think it's better to:
1) be smarter about when to do it
2) be smarter about letting the user know what you're doing
3) allow the user to postpone the check.

satana wrote on the 14 Apr 08 at 08:36

AFAIK, the journaling file systems is not need in fsck because them driver use journal for recovery FS in mount time. So, you can disable fsck (in /etc/fstab). This must be by default, of course.

ld_barthel wrote on the 15 Apr 08 at 00:48

satana: It's actually *more* important to keep fsck options for journaling file systems.

From the tune2fs man page:
"You should strongly consider the consequences of disabling mount-count-dependent checking entirely. Bad disk drives, cables, memory, and kernel bugs could all corrupt a filesystem without marking the filesystem dirty or in error. If you are using journaling on your filesystem, your filesystem will never be marked dirty, so it will not normally be checked. A filesystem error detected by the kernel will still force an fsck on the next reboot, but it may already be too late to prevent data loss at that point."

Personally, I like to use both the mount count (-c) and interval (-i) options.

I don't recall what the Ubuntu defaults are for this setting, but I wouldn't mind seeing saner settings depending on the type/role of computer. (So +1 here)

Also, given how long fsck can take, we really need better user feedback on the "no text" boot screen.

sebsauvage wrote on the 17 Apr 08 at 09:46

@ld_barthel: Thanks for the insight. Very instructive.

revzoe wrote on the 18 Apr 08 at 07:19

Since I rarely reboot, I happen to like the forced checks. But, it is possible to move them to shutdown, change the frequency, and otherwise configure them. Look in the repositories for AutoFSCK. Also, the no-feedback situation is rectified in hardy.

xiota wrote on the 14 May 08 at 04:07

The auto fsck is intended to prevent data corruption and loss. A while ago, I reduced the frequency of the auto check on several computers. Several months later, every computer that I changed the setting on had corrupt data. A lot of good the journal was. Even if it was a coincidence, it's better to leave auto fsck alone. People who are impatient (the checks do take longer as hard drives get larger) should look into using another file system.

Post your comment