| To: | Rainer Krienke <krienke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Segfault of xfs_repair during repair of a xfs filesystem |
| From: | Greg Freemyer <freemyer-ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 07 Jan 2004 10:15:20 -0500 |
| Cc: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1073487512.19559.8.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401060834240.16654-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200401071135.12886.krienke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1073487512.19559.8.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | freemyer-ml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 09:58, Greg Freemyer wrote: > On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 05:35, Rainer Krienke wrote: > > > In between I contacted the vendor of the hardware IDE raids. The technician > > confirmed that these raids have a read/write cache and that there is *no* > > battery backup. So in case of an active filesystem where suddenly there is > > a > > powerfail, it is likely that the hardware cache in the raid is not written > > to > > disk and the filesystem will be become inconsitent. And this very probably > > happened in my case. > > > XFS gurus: > > If Rainer's raid system can not have the write cache enabled, is he s/enabled/disabled/ > getting any benefit from the XFS Journaling? > > I guess if it is an external array which does not have to have its power > cycled if/when the server has its power cycled, then at least the > journaling is used in the event of a kernel lockup. > > Greg |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Segfault of xfs_repair during repair of a xfs filesystem, Greg Freemyer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: state of XFS capable linux installers, Arthur Corliss |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Segfault of xfs_repair during repair of a xfs filesystem, Greg Freemyer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Segfault of xfs_repair during repair of a xfs filesystem, Arthur Corliss |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |