| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs_check |
| From: | Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 28 May 2008 10:20:38 +0200 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20080527162605.GA30344@xxxxxx> |
| Organization: | Intellique |
| References: | <20080527162605.GA30344@xxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Le Tue, 27 May 2008 18:26:05 +0200 vous écriviez: > Is there any reason > why we shouldn't simply kill xfs_check and replaced it with a wrapper > around xfs_repair? I may add that I hardly even had any filesystem recently small enough to fit xfs_check hunger for memory. All attempts to use xfs_check invariably ended with "out of memory" for 5 years or more. Actually IIRC I used xfs_check succesfully only on IRIX, back in the time of 9GB usrroot drives :) -- -------------------------------------------------- Emmanuel Florac www.intellique.com -------------------------------------------------- |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: xfs_repair getting stuck, Barry Naujok |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Performance Characteristics of All Linux RAIDs (mdadm/bonnie++), Justin Piszcz |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: xfs_check, Barry Naujok |
| Next by Thread: | xfs_repair getting stuck, Sebastian M |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |