How can I retrieve the mount count for an ext3 volume?

[Tom Buskey]

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio <ken at jots.org> wrote:

> >>>> My Ubuntu 8.10 system uses EXT3 for the root filesystem and will
> >>>> automatically fschk the volume every 35 mounts.
> >>
> > Someday soon, Linux will have btrfs.  I don't think it does/needs fsck.
> > And ZFS doesn't fsck either.
>
> I can't vouch for ZFS, but btrfs most certainly does have both on-line and
> off-line fsck.  The neat trick is that a *LOT* of the work that fsck does
> on traditional filesystems is already part-and-parcel of btrfs (e.g.,
> you'll never need a lost+found directory, because backreferences are
> already part of btrfs's integrated metadata).  Throw in the whole bundle
> of other features -- self-aware RAID (no, it doesn't pass the Turing
> test), per-file checksums, bell, whistle, and it's good stuff.  But disks
>

I've been reading a bit on btrfs and it has some cool ideas (back
references) and improvements on ZFS,  I've been using ZFS for 3 years now.
If btrfs can get near the ease of use of ZFS's CLI along with its protection
levels (I'm sure that part will) then I think brtfs will be worth
considering instead of ZFS.


> are physical media; doing filesystem integrity checks from time to time --
> regardless of filesystem -- isn't a bad thing; even ZFS does it, though
> not via outright fsck
>

That's the zpool scrub.  ZFS is checking the integrity as it writes.


> (http://opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#whynofsck).
>
> $.02,
>
> -Ken
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20091006/f9f44834/attachment.html