lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/4] ocfs2: sysfile interfaces for online file check
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 08:29:41PM -0700, Gang He wrote:
> Hi Mark and Junxiao,
>
>
> >>>
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 04:20:27PM +0800, Junxiao Bi wrote:
> >> Hi Gang,
> >>
> >> On 11/03/2015 03:54 PM, Gang He wrote:
> >> > Hi Junxiao,
> >> >
> >> > Thank for your reviewing.
> >> > Current design, we use a sysfile as a interface to check/fix a file (via
> > pass a ino number).
> >> > But, this operation is manually triggered by user, instead of automatically
> > fix in the kernel.
> >> > Why?
> >> > 1) we should let users make this decision, since some users do not want to
> > fix when encountering a file system corruption, maybe they want to keep the
> > file system unchanged for a further investigation.
> >> If user don't want this, they should not use error=continue option, let
> >> fs go after a corruption is very dangerous.
> >
> > Maybe we need another errors=XXX flag (maybe errors=fix)?
> >
> > You both make good points, here's what I gather from the conversation:
> >
> > - Some customers would be sad if they have to manually fix corruptions.
> > This takes effort on their part, and if the FS can handle it
> > automatically, it should.
> >
> > - There are valid concerns that automatically fixing things is a change in
> > behavior that might not be welcome, or worse might lead to unforseeable
> > circumstances.
> >
> > - I will add that fixing things automatically implies checking them
> > automatically which could introduce some performance impact depending on
> > how much checking we're doing.
> >
> > So if the user wants errors to be fixed automatically, they could mount with
> > errros=fix, and everyone else would have no change in behavior unless they
> > wanted to make use of the new feature.
> That is what I want to say, add a mount option to let users to decide. Here, I want to split "error=fix"
> mount option task out from online file check feature, I think this part should be a independent feature.
> We can implement this feature after online file check is done, I want to split the feature into some more
> detailed features, implement them one by one. Do you agree this point?

Yeah that's fine, I would have automatic checking turned off though until we
have a good plan in place for users who do / don't want this.
--Mark

--
Mark Fasheh


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-19 00:01    [W:0.825 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site