Re: file systems
Ron Johnson put forth on 4/26/2011 9:29 AM:
> On 04/26/2011 02:41 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> I'm CC'ing back to debian-user as I believe others may find this
>> information useful.
>>
>> Ron Johnson put forth on 4/25/2011 11:15 PM:
>>
>>> Stan: "Thus moving to EXT4 gains you nothing on a 32 bit machine,"
>>>
>>> Ron: It gives me the ability to do a fsck!
>>
>> Only on rare occasions should one _need_ to run xfs_check or xfs_repair.
>>
>
> Only one rare occasions should one *need* to change a tire. Yet we
> still carry one in the trunk/boot.
>
> [snip]
>>
>> The reason why you use a 32 bit system is irrelevant to me. Though up
>> to this point I assumed we were discussing a server. Regardless, use
>> 'xfs_repair -n" instead of xfs_check and you should be good to go,
>> again, assuming 'xfs_repair -n' doesn't run out of memory on your
>> machine.
>>
>
> As I expect storage capacity to do nothing but grow, I'm not going to
> take that chance.
It seems strange to me that you're so adamant WRT ditching XFS on a whim
due to a well known problem WRT which you seem to have performed little
or zero basic research of your own. This is odd for someone who
apparently uses a given piece of software in production, and such a
critical piece at that. People don't normally chuck production
filesystems, especially the best Linux filesystem, on a whim without at
least doing some basic research into a problem.
I pointed you to the XFS developers' recommended workaround, 'xfs_repair
-n' and you dismissed it out of hand without looking into it, making
uneducated assumptions about its long term viability.
It's odd that you claimed xfs_check runs on your system via boot script.
xfs_check has *never* run on any platform via boot scripts, not IRIX,
not Linux. The primary reason for the invention called a journaled
filesystem, XFS being of the oldest, is to avoid running a filesystem
check at boot.
Interestingly, I don't recall ever seeing a post from you on this list,
or XFS, regarding your xfs_check issue. Maybe I simply missed them. If
so I'm sure you'll provide the archive links.
The first I recall seeing you mention this issue was in rebuttal to my
evangelism of XFS. Strange, that. This saga likely prompts people to
wonder about your motivations in this thread, and the validity of the
information you've provided and claims you've made.
Please keep replies on list.
--
Stan
Reply to: