From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q16E4YjP137750 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 08:04:34 -0600 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id c7YroGNP5Z0k8Ppe (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:04:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 09:04:29 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: xfs_repair segfaults with ag_stride option Message-ID: <20120206140429.GA10395@infradead.org> References: <4F293FCC.7010101@rhul.ac.uk> <20120202124248.GA12107@infradead.org> <4F2F23F3.9000402@rhul.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F2F23F3.9000402@rhul.ac.uk> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Tom Crane Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 12:50:59AM +0000, Tom Crane wrote: > Hi Christoph, > Many thanks for the quick response and the patch. It was a big > help. I was able to repair our 60TB FS in about 30 hours. I have a > couple of questions; > > (1) The steps in the progress report seem a little strange. See the > attachment. Is this expected? Do you mean the out of order agno progress reports? That's an artefact of the ag_stride option which parallelizes processing of different AGs, and expected. It's not very nice but I don't have a smart idea how to do much better either. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs