xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device

To: Michael Moody <michael@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:06:51 -0500
Cc: "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <98D6DBD179F61A46AF5C064829A832A0185042D267@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <98D6DBD179F61A46AF5C064829A832A0185042D261@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A42A7B7.3040403@xxxxxxxxxxx> <98D6DBD179F61A46AF5C064829A832A0185042D264@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4A42B087.5050205@xxxxxxxxxxx> <98D6DBD179F61A46AF5C064829A832A0185042D267@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302)
Michael Moody wrote:
> Are there still known issues with NFS and XFS? I'm performing the
> same test against a jfs formatted filesystem (exported via NFS), and
> so far, no issues. This is the latest centosplus kernel. Are there
> mount options which could cause XFS to have corruption?

Not that I know of.

Without details about what was corrupt, what xfs_repair said, what dmesg
said, what sysrq-t said, etc. it's hard to say.

Could be 4k stack problems if it's x86.

-Eric

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