From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:06:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m2Q26l10026317 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:06:49 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D6D016EB37B for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:07:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id QnKI6huACAh0R5H2 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:07:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <47E9AFD6.3050304@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:07:18 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: REVIEW: Write primary superblock info to ALL secondaries during mkfs References: <47E8F5BD.7000601@sandeen.net> <47E9AC67.8070809@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <47E9AC67.8070809@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: markgw@sgi.com Cc: Barry Naujok , "xfs@oss.sgi.com" Mark Goodwin wrote: > > Eric Sandeen wrote: >> One related thing I'd always wondered about was stamping a secondary at >> the very end of the device (and therefore shrinking the fs by just a >> bit) - repair could then do a quick check at the end of the device >> before resorting to scanning for the 2nd backup... would this make any >> sense? > > I guess it might, Barry what do you think? Probably makes grow a bit > more complicated. What would repair do if it doesn't find the backup > SB at the end of the device? We'd need a new SB flag to indicate it's > supposed to be there, which seems a bit chicken-and-egg'ish ... If not found at the end, just go back to the original search scheme, I'd say... -Eric