On 2015-12-02 08:45, Duncan wrote:
Austin S Hemmelgarn posted on Wed, 02 Dec 2015 07:25:13 -0500 as
excerpted:

On 2015-12-02 05:01, Duncan wrote:

[on unverified errors returned by scrub]

Unverified errors are, I believe[1], errors where a metadata block
holding checksums itself has an error, so the blocks its checksums in
turn covered are not checksum-verified.

What that means in practice is that once the first metadata block error
has been corrected in a first scrub run, a second scrub run can now
check the blocks that were recorded as unverified errors in the first
run, potentially finding and hopefully fixing additional errors[.]

---
[1] I'm not a dev and am not absolutely sure of the technical accuracy
of this description, but from an admin's viewpoint it seems to be
correct at least in practice, based on the fact that further scrubs as
long as there were unverified errors often did find additional errors,
while once the unverified count dropped to zero and the last read
errors were corrected, further scrubs turned up no further errors.

AFAICT from reading the code, that is a correct assessment.  It would be
kind of nice though if there was some way to tell scrub to recheck up to
X many times if there are unverified errors...

Yes.  For me as explained it wasn't that big a deal as another scrub was
another minute or less, but definitely on terabyte-scale filesystems on
spinning rust, where scrubs take hours, having scrub be able to
automatically track just the corrected errors along with their
unverifieds, and rescan just those, should only take a matter of a few
minutes more, while a full rescan of /everything/ would take the same
number of hours yet again... and again if there's a third scan required,
etc.

I'd say just make it automatic on corrected metadata errors as I can't
think of a reason people wouldn't want it, given the time it would save
over rerunning a full scrub over and over again, but making it an option
would be fine with me too.

I was thinking an option to do a full re-scrub, but having an automatic reparse of the metadata in a fixed metadata block would be a lot more efficient that what I was thinking :)

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to