xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Do not check ocfs2

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not check ocfs2
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 23:19:05 +0100
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5133C900.9050300@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1362269150-21478-1-git-send-email-richard@xxxxxx> <20130303011917.GI23616@dastard> <20130303100254.500b076f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5133C900.9050300@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Am Sun, 03 Mar 2013 16:04:48 -0600
schrieb Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
 > > Using xfstests I was able to trigger dlm issues in ocfs2.
> > I ran xfstests on one node and other nodes had it mounted too.
> 
> Just for my own education, how does that happen?
> 
> Were you testing on filesystems already configured into a cluster,
> or did the cluster somehow pick up your newly-defined test
> fileystems and mount them?

The cluster is already configured. But a single node can mount/unmount
the fs as it wants.

I know, xfstests is not a perfect test case for ocfs2 but it allowed me
to trigger issues...
These issues can also be triggered without xfstests. But in my case I
found them using xfstests.

> How does fsck.ocfs2 behave when you run it on one node, when the
> fs is mounted on others?  Will it proceed w/ no knowledge of the
> fact that it's mounted elsewhere?

It refuses to check the fs and exists with an error code != 0.

From the manpage:
       -F     By default fsck.ocfs2 will check with the cluster
services to ensure that the volume is not in-use (mounted) on any node
in the cluster before proceeding.  -F skips this check and should only
be used when it can be guaranteed that the volume is not mounted on any
node in the cluster. WARNING: If the cluster check is disabled and the
volume  is mounted on one or more nodes, file system corruption is very
likely. If unsure, do not use this option.

Thanks,
//richard

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