From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <201104240344.27289.errno@cox.net> <63d88c3d38162974e6c68ebc13f86f8d@ladd.quanstro.net> <201104240431.33591.errno@cox.net> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 10:36:15 -0700 Message-ID: From: John Floren To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] kfs and cwfs comparison Topicbox-Message-UUID: d3704074-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 9:10 AM, erik quanstrom wro= te: > both have a weak spot. > kfs. =A0there's one copy of the file system. =A0if you corrupt it, you're= out of > luck. =A0i've never seen this happen. > > cwfs. =A0if the fs is halted during the dump, there is a non-zero chance > of corruption. =A0i have seen this, but "recover main" can usually roll t= he > fs back to the last good dump. =A0the same mechanism can recover a fs > if an untimely shutdown has corrupted the cache. > The other day I managed to fill up a cwfs fscache, making it impossible to dump or boot the machine. Is it possible to recover from this state? John