On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 22:19 -0400, Phil Turmel wrote: > I think you should read Neil's blog entry I did ;) > before you get too excited > about raid6check. Sure it's not a magic wand for all situations... and raid6check itself seems to be rather at a early starting point... > You can only trust its decisions when you are > confident that the problems it finds are *only* due to silent read > errors. Sure.... but at least it can be misused as kinda poor-man's integrity check. AFAIU it's not yet working, that it can tell you back through the fs, which file is affected? Cheers, Chris.
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
