[OpenAFS-devel] Re: [OpenAFS] Re: 1.6 and post-1.6 OpenAFS branch management and schedule
Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:01:08 +0200
Am Donnerstag, 17. Juni 2010 21:30:23 schrieb Andrew Deason:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:59:29 -0700
> Russ Allbery <email@example.com> wrote:
> > "Christopher D. Clausen" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > I mean I occationally see NTFS errors in the event log on Windows
> > > servers. Windows doesn't take the disk offline and run a chkdsk for
> > > me to prevent potential errors, it allows me to try and access other
> > > data and if it works there are no problems and denies access to
> > > specific files or directories if there is corruption.
> > I'm quite sure that, after an unclean crash, your Windows server
> > doesn't remount the file system without doing a consistency check. No
> > operating system treats its file systems that way.
> And in particular, NTFS and other journalled filesystems have the
> advantage of a journal, and probably lots of other similarly helpful
> things. Guess what we do not have.
Right, this is actually Hartmut's point.
We have user-volumes spread out over a few fileservers, so in each partition
of such a server there are hundreds of user home-volumes.
It is very painful for the admin and his phone, if these are not back up
Being user-home volumes they are active, so DAFS does _not_ help here at all.
That's why we take the risk of some minor corruptions rather than knowing that
some hundred people cannot work at all (or simulation-jobs crash or what
Thus, there is no real alternative to us there yet.
Unless DAFS salvages some hundred volumes in parallel rather than one after
Does it do that ?
This might alleviate the problem.