On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Kees Nuyt <k.n...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 12:05:29 -0500, Tim Cook <t...@cook.ms> wrote: > > >> Doesn't a scrub do more than what > >> 'fsck' does? > >> > > Not really. fsck will work on an offline filesystem to correct errors > and > > bring it back online. Scrub won't even work until the filesystem is > already > > imported and online. If it's corrupted you can't even import it, hence > the > > -F flag addition. Plus, IIRC, scrub won't actually correct any errors, > it > > will only flag them. Manually fixing what scrub finds can be a giant > pain. > > IIRC Scrub will correct errors if the pool has sufficient > redundancy. So will any read of a corrupted block. > > http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+zfs/selfheal > -- > ( Kees Nuyt > ) > c[_] > >
Every scrub I've ever done that has found an error required manual fixing. Every pool I've ever created has been raid-z or raid-z2, so the silent healing, while a great story, has never actually happened in practice in any environment I've used ZFS in. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
