public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Steve Brooks <sjb14@st-andrews.ac.uk>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Advice needed with file system corruption
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:33:27 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160714233327.GT1922@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160714141751.GC16096@redhat.com>

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 04:17:51PM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 02:57:25PM +0100, Steve Brooks wrote:
> > Hi Carlos,
> > 
> > Many thanks again, for your good advice. I ran the version 4.3 of
> > "xfs_repair" as suggested below and it did it's job very quickly in 50
> > seconds exactly as reported in the "No modify mode". Is the time reported at
> > the end of the "No modify mode" always a good approximation of running in
> > "modify mode" ?
> 
> Good to know. But I'm not quite sure if the no modify mode could be used as a
> good approximation of a real run. I would say to not take it as true giving that
> xfs_repair can't predict the amount of time it will need to write all
> modifications it needs to do on the filesystem's metadata, and it will certainly
> can take much more time, depending on how corrupted the filesystem is.

Yup, the no-modify mode skips a couple of steps in repair - phase 5
which rebuilds freespace btrees, and phase 7 which correctly link
counts - and so can only be considered the minimum runtime in "fix
it all up" mode. FWIW, Phase 6 can also blow out massively in
runtime if there's significant directory damage that results in
needing to move lots of inodes to the lost+found directory.

> > > Hi steve.
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 01:27:22PM +0100, Steve Brooks wrote:
> > > > The "3.1.1"  version of "xfs_repair -n" ran in 1 minute, 32 seconds
> > > > 
> > > > The "4.3"     version of "xfs_repair -n" ran in 50 seconds

And it's good to know that recent performance improvements show real
world benefits, not just on the badly broken filesystems I used for
testing.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-14 23:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-14 12:27 Advice needed with file system corruption Steve Brooks
2016-07-14 13:05 ` Carlos Maiolino
2016-07-14 13:57   ` Steve Brooks
2016-07-14 14:17     ` Carlos Maiolino
2016-07-14 23:33       ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-08-08 14:11 ` Emmanuel Florac
2016-08-08 15:38   ` Roger Willcocks
2016-08-08 15:44     ` Emmanuel Florac
2016-08-09  4:02       ` Gim Leong Chin
2016-08-09 12:40         ` Carlos E. R.
2016-08-09 15:43           ` Gim Leong Chin
2016-08-09 21:26           ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-08 16:16   ` Steve Brooks

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=20160714233327.GT1922@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=sjb14@st-andrews.ac.uk \
    --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