| To: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | xfs_freeze same as umount? How is that helpful? |
| From: | Linda Walsh <xfs@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 04 Oct 2012 15:39:33 -0700 |
| In-reply-to: | <CAGpXXZJuWRAMnJfZKJMZ3N=0EwcfYOEwX+iteyk9hY7ojWA+XA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <506DAB8C.9000601@xxxxxxxxx> <CAGpXXZJuWRAMnJfZKJMZ3N=0EwcfYOEwX+iteyk9hY7ojWA+XA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.24 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 |
Greg Freemyer wrote: Conceptually it is typically: - quiesce system
----
Um... it seems that this is equivalent to being
able to umount the disk?
When I tried xfs_freeze / fs_freeze got fs-busy -- same as I would
if I tried to umount it.
I thought the point of xfs_freeze was to allow it to be brought to
a consistent state without unmounting it?
Coincidentally, after trying a few freezes, the system froze.
Last message in log was 'fetchmail' (that might have been writing a
log to /home), had hung for 120 seconds...
That was all she wrote before the entire system 'froze'...
So shouldn't xfs_freeze work without having to to shut down every
process on it? If not, then how is it different than umount?
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH v3] xfstests: Use upstream version of fstrim instead of the local one, Tomas Racek |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: get filename->inode mappings in bulk for a live fs?, Dave Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: get filename->inode mappings in bulk for a live fs?, Greg Freemyer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfs_freeze same as umount? How is that helpful?, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |