"To try to answer the question of whether we could simply disable the
periodic fsck, I decided to ask Mingming Cao, one of the developers
who has worked on ext3 and later, ext4. I just got the following:
"Periodically fsck ext3 is still needed, even if ext3 is a journalled fs.
kernel code vm/fs could be buggy, or disks IO errors, which cause
filesystem metadata corrupted silently, this can't be detected by simply
replaying the journal log.
[....]"
That must go doubly for removable disks, due to more likely unclean removal and additional risk of hardware issues (disks being carried around, etc.)
Actually there is something conclusive in this discussion: https:/ /lists. ubuntu. com/archives/ ubuntu- devel-discuss/ 2007-December/ 002764. html
"To try to answer the question of whether we could simply disable the
periodic fsck, I decided to ask Mingming Cao, one of the developers
who has worked on ext3 and later, ext4. I just got the following:
"Periodically fsck ext3 is still needed, even if ext3 is a journalled fs.
kernel code vm/fs could be buggy, or disks IO errors, which cause
filesystem metadata corrupted silently, this can't be detected by simply
replaying the journal log.
[....]"
That must go doubly for removable disks, due to more likely unclean removal and additional risk of hardware issues (disks being carried around, etc.)
And here Martin Pitt mentions a UDS decision about how to deal with fsck for fixed disks: https:/ /lists. ubuntu. com/archives/ ubuntu- devel-discuss/ 2007-December/ 002753. html