hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrzej Bialecki ...@getopt.org>
Subject Re: fsck with the move option
Date Mon, 01 May 2006 22:31:35 GMT
Yoram Arnon wrote:
> +1.
> Files that are moved are inaccessible by normal means and there's little
> reason to keep two copies of them around. A sys-admin could later either
> remove them, or try to reassemble them and return them into place. Leaving
> them in their original location just makes it harder to clean them up.
>
>   

Corrupted files are not left in their original location, if a -move 
option is specified. Fsck does not produce two copies either. As Hairong 
wrote, corrupted files are copied block by block to lost+found, and then 
removed from their original location; at the same time fsck tries to 
glue together consecutive blocks to minimize the number of remaining parts.

Yes, it is expensive. Perhaps we should add another option to -move, 
namely -recover. -move would just move corrupted files to lost+found 
using the namespace change, and -recover would try to recover remaining 
parts.

-- 
Best regards,
Andrzej Bialecki     <><
 ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _   __________________________________
[__ || __|__/|__||\/|  Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
___|||__||  \|  ||  |  Embedded Unix, System Integration
http://www.sigram.com  Contact: info at sigram dot com



Mime
View raw message