Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:28:45 -0800 From: Darryl Okahata <darrylo@soco.agilent.com> To: kalts@estpak.ee Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: background fsck deadlocks with ufs2 and big disk Message-ID: <200302202228.OAA03775@mina.soco.agilent.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:03:17 %2B0200." <20030220200317.GA5136@kevad.internal>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> wrote:
> I'll second Brad's statement about vinum and softupdates
> interactions. My last experiments with vinum were more than half a
> year ago, but I guess it still holds. BTW, the interactions showed
> up _only_ on R5 volumes. I had 6 disk (SCSI) R5 volume in Compaq
> Proliant 3000 and the system was very stable before I enabled
> softupdates.. and of course after I disabled softupdates. In between
> there were crashes and nasty problems with filesystem. Unfortunately
> it was production system and I hadn't chanche to play.
Did you believe that the crashes were caused by enabling softupdates on
an R5 vinum volume, or were the crashes unrelated to vinum/softupdates?
I can see how crashes unrelated to vinum/softupdates might trash vinum
filesystems.
--
Darryl Okahata
darrylo@soco.agilent.com
DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not
constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or
of the little green men that have been following him all day.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200302202228.OAA03775>