Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:26:52 -0500 | From | TenThumbs <> | Subject | Re: Ext2 defragmentation |
| |
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote: > > > > Doesn't this change in e2fsprogs make it harder to recover data from > a corrupt fs since there's no obvious way to know where to look for > backup superblocks. > > Yes, there is that downside. We should have put at least one set of > backup superblocks at a fixed location, but that's one of the things we > didn't do when we were originally designing ext2. Hmmm... it may be > possible to put a fixed superblock on larger-sized filesystems by having > mke2fs create a .backup_superblock file, which make life easier for some > folks. (Folks who decide they desparately need the extra space back can > just delete the file.) > > - Ted
Isn't this still the problem of storing fs metadata within a potentially corrupt fs? I think storing the backup superblock locations outside the fs would be a good idea. Is it possible to add an option to tune2fs to report this info so one could store it on a floppy or print it or something?
I've noticed another anomaly. When mke2fs 1.18 creates a 1.3GB partition, it says the first backup superblock is at 32768 not 32769. Is this an off-by-one error?
-- IE5 is the best looking program to ever screw up my system
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |