| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RHEL ES 4 |
| From: | "evilninja@xxxxxxx" <evilninja@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 18 Nov 2005 17:45:50 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <437E0297.40807@sgi.com> |
| References: | <32927.68.52.44.223.1132279914.squirrel@66.238.243.52> <437D6935.2090905@sgi.com> <1132326431.12165.9.camel@rwthompson.landmarkdigital.com> <437DFBD8.3070106@gmx.net> <437E0297.40807@sgi.com> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mail/News 1.6a1 (Windows/20051004) |
Eric Sandeen schrieb:
Oh, repair on a 300T filesystem -wil-l be painful anywhere, I think, unfortunately. hm, painful yes, but hopefully not impossible? otherwise if sth. goes wrong on a 300TB fs the only way to fix it would be restoring from backup, no matter how tiny the corruption might be (and xfs_repair could fix it easliy if only the volume was not so big).... -- BOFH excuse #5: static from plastic slide rules |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: RHEL ES 4, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RHEL ES 4, Peter Grandi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RHEL ES 4, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RHEL ES 4, Peter Grandi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |