From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:26:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m6FFQXbC018968 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:26:34 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id AD01312E52E3 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 4j4OssHfxlbOrVOR for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 08:27:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <487CC1EB.6030100@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:27:39 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Is it possible the check an frozen XFS filesytem to avoid downtime References: <200807141542.51613.ms@teamix.de> <487C1BAF.2030404@sgi.com> <200807150944.13277.ms@teamix.de> In-Reply-To: <200807150944.13277.ms@teamix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Martin Steigerwald Cc: Timothy Shimmin , xfs@oss.sgi.com Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Okay... we recommended the customer to do it the safe way unmounting the > filesystem completely. He did and the filesystem appear to be intact *phew*. > XFS appeared to detect the in memory corruption early enough. > > Its a bit strange however, cause we now know that the server sports ECC RAM. > Well we will see what memtest86+ has to say about it. in-memory corruption could mean, but certainly does not absolutely mean, problematic memory. It could be, and usually is, a plain ol' bug (in xfs or elsewhere). -Eric