From: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfs_repair of critical volume
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 11:30:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201012041130.20344.Martin@lichtvoll.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CDDBC5C.7020708@hardwarefreak.com>
Am Freitag 12 November 2010 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> Michael Monnerie put forth on 11/12/2010 7:22 AM:
> > I find the robustness of XFS amazing: You overwrote 1/5th of the disk
> > with zeroes, and it still works :-)
>
> This isn't "robustness" Michael. If anything it's a serious problem.
> XFS is reporting that hundreds or thousands of files that have been
> physically removed still exist. Regardless of how he arrived at this
> position, how is this "robust"? Most people would consider this
> inconsistency of state a "corruption" situation, not "robustness".
I think its necessary to differentiate here:
1) It appears to be robustness - or pure luck - regarding metadata
consistency of the filesystem. I tend to believe its pure luck and that XFS
just stored the metadata on the other RAID arrays.
2) XFS does not seem to have a way to detect whether file contents are
still valid and consistent. It shares that with I think every other Linux
filesystem instead BTRFS which uses checksumming for files. (Maybe NILFS as
well, I don't know, and the FUSE or the other ZFS port).
Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-04 10:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-31 7:54 xfs_repair of critical volume Eli Morris
2010-10-31 9:54 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-11-12 8:48 ` Eli Morris
2010-11-12 13:22 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-11-12 22:14 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-11-13 8:19 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-11-13 9:28 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-11-13 15:35 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-11-14 3:31 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-12-04 10:30 ` Martin Steigerwald [this message]
2010-12-05 4:49 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-12-05 9:44 ` Roger Willcocks
2010-11-12 23:01 ` Eli Morris
2010-11-13 15:25 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-11-14 11:05 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-15 4:09 ` Eli Morris
2010-11-16 0:04 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-17 7:29 ` Eli Morris
2010-11-17 7:47 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-30 7:22 ` Eli Morris
2010-12-02 11:33 ` Michael Monnerie
2010-12-03 0:58 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-12-04 0:43 ` Eli Morris
2010-10-31 14:10 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-10-31 14:41 ` Steve Costaras
2010-10-31 16:52 ` Roger Willcocks
2010-11-01 22:21 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-11-01 23:32 ` Eli Morris
2010-11-02 0:14 ` Eric Sandeen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-10-31 19:56 Eli Morris
2010-10-31 20:40 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-11-01 3:40 ` Eli Morris
2010-11-01 10:07 ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-10-31 21:10 ` Steve Costaras
2010-11-01 15:03 ` Stan Hoeppner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201012041130.20344.Martin@lichtvoll.de \
--to=martin@lichtvoll.de \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox