[Top] [All Lists]


To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: RHEL ES 4
From: Jon Lewis <jlewis@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:16:51 -0500 (EST)
In-reply-to: <437E0297.40807@xxxxxxx>
References: <32927.> <437D6935.2090905@xxxxxxx> <1132326431.12165.9.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <437DFBD8.3070106@xxxxxxx> <437E0297.40807@xxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Eric Sandeen wrote:

i recall an issue, where one was in need to xfs_check/xfs_repair a big xfs volume and did not have enough memory. with sizes like yours i'd run xfs_check & friends before going into production, just in case...

but then again i don't remember the thread this issue was discussed, so it's totally bogus perhaps...

Oh, repair on a 300T filesystem -wil-l be painful anywhere, I think, unfortunately.

There's a big difference between painful (waiting days, weeks? for an fsck), and impossible (needing more physical memory than can be installed) to do the fsck.

One fs this large seems like a recipe for trouble. What are you planning on storing?

 Jon Lewis                   |  I route
 Senior Network Engineer     |  therefore you are
 Atlantic Net                |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________

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