Chris Wedgewood writes:
> As I said, I'm not takling about kernel based fsck, although for
> _VERY_ large filesystems even with journalling I suspect it will be
> required one day (so it can run in the background and do consistency
> checking when the machine is idle).
Actually, I was talking with Ted about this, and we agreed that:
a) kernel-based e2fsck is a pain in the a** (locking issues, etc)
b) you can do an LVM snapshot of your live filesystem and do a read-only
fsck on that to check if the filesystem is still OK. For journaled
filesystems like reiserfs and ext3, they need to use the super method
write_super_lockfs() to block I/O and flush everything to disk at the
time of the snapshot, to ensure that they don't need recovery on a
read-only device. This makes the LVM snapshot equivalent to unmount
the filesystem, copy contents to a new device and remount the filesystem.
While (b) doesn't let you fix a filesystem online, unless there is a kernel
bug or hardware problem, you should not have a problem. If you have either
of those, then fixing the filesystem online is just asking for more problems
in the future.
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 07 2001 - 21:00:23 EST