Am 21.08.2017 um 19:33 schrieb Chris Murphy:
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 2:37 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2017, Chris Murphy wrote:
Since md doesn't read from both mirrors, it's possible there's a read from
a non-corrupt drive, which presents good information to fsck, which then
sees no reason to fix anything in that block; but the other mirror does have
corruption which thus goes undetected.
That was exactly what I wrote.
One way of dealing with it is to scrub (repair) so they both have the same
information to hand over to fsck. Fixups then get replicated to disks by md.
Yes, it is, but that would require a full repair before doing fsck. That
seems excessive because that will take hours on larger drives.
Hence we have ZFS and Btrfs and dm-integrity to unambiguously identify
corruption and prevent it from escaping to higher levels
where do we have ZFS?
where do we have *stable* BTRFS after Redhat gave up recently?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
