xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: been a while before i could get back to this..

To: "l.a walsh" <xfs@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: been a while before i could get back to this..
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 19:48:10 +1100
Cc: "'Eric Sandeen'" <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <000101c2dc9d$28214380$1403a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; from xfs@xxxxxxxxx on Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 11:11:46PM -0800
References: <20030225062313.GG6057@frodo> <000101c2dc9d$28214380$1403a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 11:11:46PM -0800, l.a walsh wrote:
> Hmmm....
>       xfsdump seems to be running now ....

Thats good to hear.

>       So 1) Maybe xfsdump or the 'getbulkstat' operation should
> be slightly more fault tolerant?  Seems like shutting down
> the file system wasn't the most informative action to take.

*nod* ... this could possibly be made like some of the directory
code which doesn't shutdown, but returns errors back out.

>       Perhaps more important (2): it would be REAL helpful if
> either xfs_repair or xfs_check would return an indication
> that there is a problem on a mounted filesystem
> (not necessarily correct the problem, though that would be ideal),
> but at least give me a way of determining that there is a
> problem so I can know that I should do a repair (hopefully before
> the system is taken down by an xfsdump).

cheers.

--
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>