From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 13 04:56:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8126516A420 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 04:56:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh2.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9C7C43D53 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2006 04:56:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [192.168.42.21] (andersonbox1.centtech.com [192.168.42.21]) by mh2.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k2D4uTRR034784; Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:56:30 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <4414FB7B.2050203@centtech.com> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:56:27 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060112) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4411A43E.5080500@centtech.com> <20060311043658.GA39298@xor.obsecurity.org> <4412576E.2030505@centtech.com> <20060311053201.GB40172@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060311053201.GB40172@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1326/Sat Mar 11 14:33:54 2006 on mh2.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Snapshot ufs blocking X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 04:56:31 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 10:51:58PM -0600, Eric Anderson wrote: > >> Kris Kennaway wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 10:07:26AM -0600, Eric Anderson wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Since there's been some chatter about snapshots recently, I thought I'd >>>> give more snapshots a try along with some quick tests. >>>> >>>> >>> Per my message yesterday, not all known snapshot bugs are fixed in 6.x >>> yet. >>> >>> >> Right - I was expecting that. I'm mostly trying to offer some details >> on what is not working - if this is already clearly known, and no >> further debugging is needed, then I'll drift off into silence. However, >> if more debugging is needed, including dumps, etc, I can provide those, >> as I have a real 2TB volume essentially empty I can do hard testing on >> during daytime hours right now. >> >> I'm certainly not complaining - just trying to help in the way that I can. >> > > Thanks. There is an uncommitted patch being circulated that is > believed to address all remaining problems. It relies on other fixes > in -CURRENT that are not yet merged, but if you're able to test it let > me know and I'll forward. > I can definitely test it - I'm running 6-STABLE currently, but I suppose I could get -CURRENT on there for the testing.. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------