regular fsck runs are too disturbing

Dane Mutters dmutters at
Mon Dec 3 15:59:28 UTC 2007

On Sun, 2007-12-02 at 22:55 +0000, (=?utf-8?q?=60=60-=5F-=C2=B4=C2=B4?=)
-- Fernando wrote:
> On Monday 22 October 2007 01:51:03 Dane Mutters wrote:
> > I think that there is an occasional need to check the file system for
> > errors, but I think that it might work better as an optional, but
> > "highly recommended" thing.
> > 
> > Here's another case in point:
> > 
> > I have been working to set up an Ubuntu-based Asterisk phone server at
> > my workplace.  For this application, having to wait even 1 minute for
> > the system to reboot (if necessary) is barely tolerable, but if it ever
> > has to be restarted for any reason, and then insists on spending the
> > next 5 minutes doing a fsck, thus rendering the business phone-less,
> > that would surely make my employers very frustrated.
> > 
> > I'm sure this has already been discussed, but I wish to add my opinion
> > to that of others who believe that a better solution is needed.  Surely,
> > fsck is a really good idea, but for certain uses of Ubuntu, it's really
> > not practical.  I'm sure that something else can be devised.
> > 
> > Keep up the good work.
> > 
> > --Dane
> Dane , you can manually bypass this by using tune2fs, and disable the fsck on your server.

	While I personally know how to use tune2fs to this effect, not
everybody else does.  Also, it's rather easy to forget to set this.  I
don't know if there is a better solution that running it at boot (I
realize that it's a bad idea to run fsck on a mounted drive), but it
would be nice to at least be able to cancel the check (assuming there's
not another solution that can run on a mounted FS).


More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list