Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I don't want to avoid doing a fsck, but I would like to know if there is a better approach so it doesn't take ages to complete the process when it runs after a reboot 180 days later.

If you had it ran 20 days ago and then do it again, will it be faster or it does a full check all the time and it would be meaningless to do such thing ?

What would be the best practice to keep it up to date and yet minimize the time it takes to recheck each run ?

share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Running fsck more often won't help.

What will help is using ext4 instead of ext3. This is an explicit design goal of the updated filesystem.

share|improve this answer
    
I belive I am using ext3 instead of 4, but most of the files inside the server are media files used daily and the average size if from 100mb to 4gb and from the page you linked the tests were mainly made with small files would you still think the difference would be bigger lets say 50% or even more in the runtime ? –  Prix Dec 10 '10 at 5:09
1  
The extents that are implemented in ext4 should speed up the fsck for large files. –  Mircea Vutcovici Dec 10 '10 at 6:02

Switch to XFS. Fsck scans will become instant.

share|improve this answer
    
Well, fsck.xfs basically just returns success without doing anything. There are xfs_check and xfs_repair utilities for when you need them. –  thomasrutter Feb 10 '11 at 9:32

Delete all unnecessary files. fsck's time is proportional to the number of files it checks.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for the recommendation but there are not files that can be deleted on the given HD. –  Prix Dec 10 '10 at 7:46

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.