Am 13.03.2018 um 18:08 schrieb Andreas Dilger:
On Mar 13, 2018, at 10:36 AM, Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 07:23:44AM +0100, Lukas Czerner wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 09:14:53AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
Create an e2scrub_all command to find all ext* filesystems
and run an online scrub against them all.
Sorry for not bringing that up before, by why don't we have
e2scrub -a
instead of this ? Wouldn't it be better to have just one tool ?
I'd rather have two simple tools that each do one thing ("scrub this
ext4 lvm volume") ("find all ext4 lvm volumes and run scrub") than
combine them into one less cohesive tool. There's precedence here with
fsck.$fstype and fsck, where the first one performs an offline check of a
single filesystem and the second one (if you fsck -A) finds all the
individual filesystems and feeds them through fsck.$fstype. In the
longer term it probably makes sense to set up a fsscrub wrapper to
invoke the fs-specific scrub tools.
Though now that I think about that, e2scrub probably ought to take a
mount point and translate that into a lvm volume, which makes
e2scrub_all mostly a dumb iterator of /proc/mounts.
Except that won't scrub offline volumes, nor will all mounted ext4
filesystems be LVs that can be scrubbed, so I don't think that is
an improvement
why is that at all limited to ext4 on top of LVM?
both layers should not need to know from each other - feels not that
good for the long term having different paths of code depending on the
underlying block layer (raw-disk, mdraid, lvm, lvm-on-mdraid...)
