On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:08:11AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> 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.
Ok, I'll modify e2scrub so that you can pass it either (a) a lvm block
device or (b) a mountpoint for a filesystem on a lvm block device.
e2scrub_all will retain its ability to schedule a check even if the fs
isn't mounted.
--D
> Cheers, Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
