>> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 02:19:03PM -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote:
>> > I do a xfs_fsr and mapcheck nightly.
>> this is bad
>> if you're fragmenting badly enough to need this, you should address
>> the cause of that --- otherwise, for small moderate amounts of
>> fragmentation the loss of file-locality is worse for many people
I did it as a precaution. I guess I've had too much MS training.
I will add a fragmentation test. If it is too bad I will log/e-mail and run
xfs_fsr.
>> > Specifically, it is a shell script for doing a read-only fsck of a
>> > mounted FS.
>> > It uses a LVM snapshot to perform fsck on, then echo's an error to a
>> > log file if it encounters a problem
>> >
>> > The idea is that a system with long uptimes could verify the FS
>> > structure is valid from time to time.
>> yes, this is what i mention about ... a lvn/frozen fs snapshot and
>> xfs_repair but NOT readonly would work but is overkill
>> xfs_repair -n (read only) isn't very useful
Am I understanding you correctly:
1) With a read-only snapshot there is not a FS consistency checker.
ie. this would not be useful:
create readonly snapshot
if [xfs_repair -n snapshot != 0]
email admin
2) With a read/write snapshot, something like the below may work.
Weekly (or monthly)
create r/w snapshot
mount snapshot r/w (and repair any issues caused by the snapshot process)
unmount snapshot
if (xfs_repair != 0)
email admin
>> > It does not support XFS, but maybe it could be expanded to do that?
>> there is nothing to prevent what i suggest working with xfs
>> > If so, maybe this would be good candidate for the contrib section.
>> i'm sure people would welcome such a thing if you were to provide it
Updating the script seems easy enough, but if r/w snapshots are needed to
run/test it, I doubt I will make the effort. (i.e. I think you need a DM
enabled kernel for that, right?)
Greg
--
Greg Freemyer
|