On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 00:20:12 +1000, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 00:17, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > ..I have had a few cases of ext3fs'es, even on raid-1, going > > read-only on errors, what do you guys use to bring them back > > into service? > > What happens on error conditions can be set through tune2fs or as a > mount option. Having it remount read-only is probably better than > panicing the kernel. ..yeah, except in /var/log, /var/spool et al, I also lean towards panic in /home. > When it happens a reboot may be a good idea, in which case a fsck to > fix the problem should occur automatically. ..should, agrrrRRRRRRRrrreed. IME (RH73 - RH9 and woody) it does not. ..what happens is the journaling dies, leaving a good fs intact, on rebooting, the dead journal will "repair" the fs wiping good data off the fs. ..compare 'df -h' and 'cat /proc/mounts' on such a system. ..the errors=remount,ro fstab option remounts the fs ro but fails to tell the system, so the system merrily "logs" data and "accepts" mail etc 'till Dooms Day, and especially on raid-1 disks I sort of expected redundancy, like in "autofeather the bad prop and trim out the yaw" and "autopatch that holed fuel tank", and "auto-sync the props", I mean, this was done _60_years_ ago in aviation to help win WWII, and ext3 on raid-1 floats around USS Yorktown-style??? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]