xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: can xfs_repair guarantee a complete clean filesystem?

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: can xfs_repair guarantee a complete clean filesystem?
From: hank peng <pengxihan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:34:55 +0800
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ANTXEgk+NBFmAztFUUTauKMydz2pHpgpCEyDn+K4M2A=; b=A9LcfwYgVyUl5DZ/0M5JCu300exZpoDB7c4cDQSVZDKRH0qRy5mVvVIujeWPtH7gmE wXu9Fhdae5FL/OXH2D/IV02RxbQmDGBAo3sUjwpMguICEF8FVyq3ZkGXRjkaws9c1rpp h7RkRCamim4NDW/wZClwG9nbXIeV3Sic1uQS8=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=L4AWff4wEv2jxtemE/ggobyrJwBPkWv8GBYvkJymUA+74Ex/GZgDJmoUGabI2H0MlI 4CYDSt9/EUVaRAqbLMhkQaH7Qhxc9v2heiG1617impe5Be0GFCslYdI0CX8qIk7hgiT5 eTkQ++TbyVTrWBdwhF39aIhFR9/bLb5benWms=
In-reply-to: <4B14B077.5090500@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <389deec70911301805j37df7397l1c3ddbbad7e91768@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4B14936F.7040401@xxxxxxxxxxx> <389deec70911302037v19764c2cr7686b353c5e933fa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4B14B077.5090500@xxxxxxxxxxx>
2009/12/1 Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> hank peng wrote:
>> 2009/12/1 Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> hank peng wrote:
>>>> When using xfs_repair, I want my XFS filesystem complete clean and
>>>> continue to work even if some files lost. Becase we use XFS in low-end
>>>> NAS box, customers want a tool to repair the filesystem when it has
>>>> problem and they allow some files be lost and don't want the whole
>>>> system to stop.
>>>> So, I wonder if xfs_repair or some other tools can satisfy this funciton?
>>>>
>>> Yes, that is exactly its purpose (any potential bugs notwithstanding...)
>>>
>> Thanks for your reply.
>> Is there some points I should notice about when using xfs_repair? I
>> used to encounter some cases in which xfs_repair complete successfully
>> but some errors like "Corrupt in memory detected" occured when the
>> filesytem is put into online for short time.
>
> It's possible that you encountered a bug (in xfs or elsewhere), or
> bad hardware...
>
>> Should I reboot the machine and use xfs_repair before the damaged
>> filesystem is used, or some other options I should use?
>
> Just unmount the filesystem, run repair, and remount.
>
>> In addition, I googled some information and found that some people say
>> xfs_check should be used before xfs_repair, is it right?
>
> There's no need; xfs_check doesn't scale very well, and xfs_repair -n will do
> a check-only run if that's what you want.
>
> xfs_check checks a little more than xfs_repair, but xfs_repair simply
> rebuilds those things it doesn't check in any case.
>
> -Eric
>
Today, I encountered a problem:
I use "xfs_repair -L “ on a damaged filesystem and a lot of messages
output which include "moving disconnected inodes to lost+found ...".
Then I can remount the filesystem successfully and decided to remove
those files in lost+found directory, but it printed the following
message:
root@1234dahua:/mnt/Pool_md1/ss1/lost+found# rm -rf *
rm: cannot stat '710': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '728': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '729': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '730': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '731': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '732': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '733': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '734': Structure needs cleaning
rm: cannot stat '735': Structure needs cleaning

Other directories and files seems normal to access, is it not allowed
to delete files in lost+found directory after repair, then what should
I do?

>>> -Eric
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
The simplest is not all best but the best is surely the simplest!

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