Always consistent [LWN.net]

Always consistent

Posted Sep 6, 2007 19:51 UTC (Thu) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054)
In reply to: The many faces of fsck by jwb
Parent article: The many faces of fsck

Yeah, the description of zdb reminded me of the early days of XFS on Irix,
when we were told that no fsck was necessary because it was always
consistent. Then later it was discovered that, yes, even journaling filesystems
can get corrupted, and xfs_check and xfs_repair were added. (Which I've
personally had to use on at least two separate occasions.)

Also, I must dispute the author's characterization of "xfs_check" as more
pronouncable than "fsck". fsck lacks that nasty underscore, so it's much easier
to tell someone to run fsck than xfs_check. "fsck" is also easier to say (however
you say it) and type.

(Log in to post comments)

Always consistent

Posted Sep 6, 2007 20:34 UTC (Thu) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link]

NetApp's fsck is (or at least was, at one time) "wack" which is surely the easiest to pronounce.

Always consistent

Posted Sep 7, 2007 0:48 UTC (Fri) by vaurora (guest, #38407) [Link]

Yeah, "wafl_check" indeed used to be "wack." I don't know the story behind the name change, but it seems likely that either the pronunciation was too confusing ("You want me to whack the file system? Are you crazy?"), or someone performed a humor-ectomy after NetApp got really successful.