From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: milov@cs.uwlax.edu (Milo Velimirovic) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 21:58:00 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] shutdown for pre-v7 unix In-Reply-To: References: <699EC97F-61D6-4102-99E1-8752E8CBD381@bsdimp.com> <2DF13A78-6D26-4E01-A65A-7746A51F44FB@ronnatalie.com> Message-ID: Three for the Elven-kings under the sky, On Jul 17, 2014, at 9:52 PM, Tim Newsham wrote: > One sync for the disks and two for the operator's peace of mind... > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Ronald Natalie wrote: >> >> On Jul 17, 2014, at 4:16 PM, Clem Cole wrote: >> >> I think that's is a problem in that it needs to be data blocks, inodes, and >> finally superblocks to do the least damage in a crash. >> >> >> That is definitely the case and that was perhaps the biggest fix in BSD (and >> other later) was to make the file system writing more consistent so at least >> you didn't get trashed filesystems but at worst got some orphaned blocks >> that needed intervention to reclaim. >> >> It was mandatory for operators at JHU to understand how the file system was >> laid out on disk, and what icheck/dcheck reported and what the options to >> fix things. Link counts that were too low and dups in free should NEVER >> happen with an intelligently ordered set of I/O operations, but thats not >> what Version 6 UNIX had. It wasn't uncommon to find several errors in the >> file system that would be degenerate system faults if not corrected. >> >> But all that aside, even in those shakey days, typing sync multiple times >> really didn't accomplish anything and it because less useful as the file >> systems became more stable. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> TUHS mailing list >> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org >> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs >> > > > > -- > Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs