[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3

To: <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3
From: "Mike Gigante" <mg@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 09:12:27 +1100
Importance: Normal
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
It is a shame that his original message went out without
the appropriate caveats...


-----Original Message-----
From: Felipe Alfaro Solana [mailto:felipe_alfaro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, 4 March 2004 8:52 AM
To: Mike Gigante
Subject: RE: Desktop Filesystem Benchmarks in 2.6.3

On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 21:08, Mike Gigante wrote:

> Well, *that* shouldn't be that much of a problem anymore.  
> Knoppix, MandrakeMove, and other "drop in a CD" solutions 
> support XFS. Knoppix has supported XFS for a *long* time.

It's a pity I didn't know about Knoppix at that time.

> From what I am hearing, it seems you gave up too easily.
> That is perfectly reasonable for a test system. If it was
> a production system, I'm sure you would have tried a *lot*
> harder and you could have got most of your data back :-)

You are totally right: I didn't try much hard to recover the data, since
it was a test bed system.

> Just curious - did you seek help from the xfs mailing 
> list at the time? Submit a bug?

No, I must confess I tried recovering the volume by myself, googling
around and reading the man page for xfs_recover. I didn't seek help from
XFS mailing list, but as you have guessed, I didn't try harder due to
time constraints and the fact that I could afford losing the entire
volume. Obviously, if the machine had been a production server, I would
have tried by all means to recover up to the last bit out of that XFS

I'm sorry I didn't take the issue seriously at the moment.

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