On Fri, 2004-09-03 at 21:14, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2004-09-03 18:01, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy_at_hub.org> wrote: > > > > load: 0.99 cmd: fsck 67 [running] 15192.26u 142.30s 99% 184284k > > /dev/da0s1h: phase 4: cyl group 408 of 866 (47%) > > > > wouldn't it be possible, on a dual CPU system, to have group 434 and above > > run on one process, while group 433 and below running on the second, in > > parallel? Its not like the drives are being beat up: > > My intuition says that if metadata of the first part of the disk references > data residing on the second part synchronization and locking would probably > be a bit difficult; actually very difficult. My intuition tells me that it would be a much better solution to run multiple fsck's concurrently. What harm could there be in fscking (num of processors) partitions at the same time?Received on Fri Sep 03 2004 - 19:35:17 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:10 UTC