From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id oACMDOZu165957 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:13:24 -0600 Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 07D1D13B51C8 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:14:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (mo-65-41-216-221.sta.embarqhsd.net [65.41.216.221]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id L4eiOeZQgO7HHp3b for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:14:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.100.53] (gffx.hardwarefreak.com [192.168.100.53]) by greer.hardwarefreak.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E7E6C105 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:14:52 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <4CDDBC5C.7020708@hardwarefreak.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:14:52 -0600 From: Stan Hoeppner MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: xfs_repair of critical volume References: <75C248E3-2C99-426E-AE7D-9EC543726796@ucsc.edu> <4CCD3CE6.8060407@hardwarefreak.com> <864DA9C9-B4A4-4B6B-A901-A457E2B9F5A5@ucsc.edu> <201011121422.28993@zmi.at> In-Reply-To: <201011121422.28993@zmi.at> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Michael Monnerie put forth on 11/12/2010 7:22 AM: > I find the robustness of XFS amazing: You overwrote 1/5th of the disk > with zeroes, and it still works :-) This isn't "robustness" Michael. If anything it's a serious problem. XFS is reporting that hundreds or thousands of files that have been physically removed still exist. Regardless of how he arrived at this position, how is this "robust"? Most people would consider this inconsistency of state a "corruption" situation, not "robustness". -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs