| To: | Rekrutacja119 <rekrutacja119@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs I/O error |
| From: | Iustin Pop <iusty@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 24 Feb 2008 13:31:29 +0100 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <2db2c6b80802240352o301a0d15q991efb97a1dbff82@mail.gmail.com> |
| Mail-followup-to: | Rekrutacja119 <rekrutacja119@xxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <2db2c6b80802231346r78d59381j49927e15f40e7ef8@mail.gmail.com> <20080223220818.GC27124@teal.hq.k1024.org> <2db2c6b80802231414m38f70795n7f24fea1a40195df@mail.gmail.com> <20080224090106.GD27124@teal.hq.k1024.org> <2db2c6b80802240352o301a0d15q991efb97a1dbff82@mail.gmail.com> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) |
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:52:38PM +0100, Rekrutacja119 wrote: > smartctl -t offline is i think scheduling a SMART test ah yes, you're right, I'm sorry. I would recommend to use not -t offline but -t long - AFAIK, the 'offline' test just updates the attributes but not scan the whole of the disk. In any case, I don't think a smart test is better than badblocks... regards, iustin |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: xfs I/O error, Ragnar Kjørstad |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | xfs recovery - is it possible, office |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: xfs I/O error, Rekrutacja119 |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfs I/O error, Rekrutacja119 |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |