[TUHS] The evolution of Unix facilities and architecture

Clem Cole clemc at ccc.com
Sat May 13 01:17:02 AEST 2017


George Gobble of Purdue did the FS work to V7/4.1 to fix the FS corruption
issues.   That was taken back by Kirk (wnj) and incorporated in 4.1A.    It
may have been before USENIX was creating proceedings.   I'll have to look
on my shelf at home or maybe ask George.

Clem

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:

>     > From: "Ron Natalie"
>
>     > Ordered writes go back to the original BSD fast file system, no?  I
> seem
>     > to recall that when we switched from our V6/V7 disks, the filesystem
> got
>     > a lot more stable in crashes.
>
> I had a vague memory of reading about that, so I looked in the canonical
> FFS
> paper (McKusick et al, "A Fast File System for UNIX" [1984)]) but found no
> mention of it.
>
> I did find a paper about 'fsck' (McKusick, Kowalski, "Fsck: The UNIX File
> System Check Program") which talks (in Section 2.5. "Updates to the file
> system") about how "problem[s] with asynchronous inode updates can be
> avoided
> by doing all inode deallocations synchronously", but it's not clear if
> they're
> talking about something that was actually done, or just saying
> (hypothetically) that that's how one would fix it.
>
> Is is possible that the changes to the file system (e.g. the way free
> blocks
> were kept) made it more crash-proof?
>
>      Noel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170512/05b363ef/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the TUHS mailing list