At Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:09:03 +0800,
Liu Yuan wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:45:23AM +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
> > Current object repair strategy of "dog vdi check" doesn't work well if
> > objects are corrupted. The first one adds a test for the case, and the
> > second patch adds a mechanism for majority voting in the command.
> > 
> > v5: drop ignore change in v4
> 
> Applied after fixing new blank line at EOF for 077

Oops, thanks for your fix.

> 
> I'd like to see patche(s) that deal with the case when majority object isn't
> found. What in my head to deal with this is:
> 
> - add an option 'depth' for 'dog vdi track' command to get the information of
> targeted object placement.
> 
> With this information, people can do a manual copy\overwrite to 
> missing/inconsistent
> objects.
> 

I agree. In addition, corrupted or lost inode objects should be
repaired by dog vdi repair. I'll implement them later.

Thanks,
Hitoshi
-- 
sheepdog mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/sheepdog

Reply via email to