From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Fajar A. Nugraha" Subject: Re: Honest timeline for btrfsck Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 08:19:59 +0700 Message-ID: References: <4E8F4EA9.4090108@shiftmail.org> <201110072219.52773.diegocg@gmail.com> <4E90BD12.9020407@shiftmail.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 To: linux-btrfs Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4E90BD12.9020407@shiftmail.org> List-ID: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Asdo wrote: > On 10/07/11 22:19, Diego Calleja wrote: >> >> On Viernes, 7 de Octubre de 2011 21:10:33 Asdo escribi=F3: >>> >>> failures, but you can always mount by rolling back to a previous >>> uberblock, showing an earlier view of the filesystem, which would b= e >>> consistent. >> >> This is already available in Btrfs, command btrfsck -s. > > Whops!? Then I am wondering what causes these corrupted unmountable > filesystems. "-s" does not select previous uberblock. It selects alternate uberblock= =2E > I think that in Btrfs wiki (which is now down) there was written that= btrfs > was substantially stable, with the only exception that a power loss c= ombined > with drives not honoring barriers could result in an unmountable > filesystems. for this condition btrfs-zero-log will be more useful --=20 =46ajar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" = in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html