On Thu, 2003-06-05 at 06:02, Andrew Mathews wrote:
> Not to diminish Set's original request, but to address this comment...
>
> I guess your term "knee-jerk reaction" is subjective. I'd much rather
> have a recoverable system than an unrecoverable one, which is exactly
> what you'll have if the filesystem is put into an unstable state
> (corruption) and isn't intelligent enough to protect itself from further
> damage.
I've had my DEC box, running a now oldish DU 4.0 do that to our main
user file system - it found problems and tried to limp along, eventually
corrupting the disk to 'mkfs time' to get the system working again. None
of the online Dec ADFS tools would touch it.
Cuts both ways, yes.
So my experience is let it take the system out, letting it limp along
will just trash the FS further, which in the long run might cost your
MORE downtime. (Quicker to run repair programs than to restore from
tape!)
|