On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 04:29:06PM -0400, Mag Gam wrote: >> >> So, if a reiserFs filesystem is damaged and it naturally do a fsck. >> The fsck basically recreated the b-tree by scanning from 1 to end of >> the filesystem? > > If the filesystem is sufficiently damaged such that portions of the > b-tree can't be found, then yes. Otherwise, the data would be totally > lost. As you can imagine, scaning every single block on the disk to > see if it looks like filesystem metadata is quite slow, so naturally > the reiserfs's fsck will avoid doing it if at all possible. But if > the root or top-level nodes of the B-tree is damaged, it doesn't have > much choice. > > - Ted > > But, if thats the last and worst case scenario why don't they do the full scan? Sure its going to take a long time if its a big filesystem (there should be no changes since it would be unmounted), but its better than not having any data at all... _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
