[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
RE: FSCK?
- From: "Jason A. Lixfeld" <jlixfeld fastvibe com>
- To: "'Theodore Tso'" <tytso mit edu>,"'David GXmez'" <davidge jazzfree com>
- Cc: "'Andrew Morton'" <akpm zip com au>,"'Statux'" <statux bigfoot com>, <ext3-users redhat com>
- Subject: RE: FSCK?
- Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 00:04:25 -0400
Hehe, well that's reassuring! :)
So does someone else suggest that I try going down to 2.4.9?!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext3-users-admin redhat com
> [mailto:ext3-users-admin redhat com] On Behalf Of Theodore Tso
> Sent: October 20, 2001 11:59 PM
> To: David GXmez
> Cc: Andrew Morton; Statux; Jason A. Lixfeld; ext3-users redhat com
> Subject: Re: FSCK?
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 04:13:33PM +0200, David GXmez wrote:
> >
> > LVM is not the cause of the problem. I also had the same problem: a
> > fsck on an ext3 partition, lots of errors, and next time the only
> > thing that left on the partition was a lost+found directory
> with the
> > remains of what was my ext3 filesystem.
> >
> > I was using 2.4.10 when this happened, maybe is this the problem?
> > Jason?
> >
>
> Using 2.4.10 is almost certainly a bad move, and probably was
> responsible for your lossage. Quite frankly, at the moment
> all of my production machines are running 2.4.9 with ext3,
> and it's quite stable; I'm not sure I trust any of the more
> recent kernels at this point (due the VM code, not the ext3
> code). Of course, I don't trust the LVM code at all,
> regardless of kernel version, but that probably has something
> to do with the fact that when I looked at the code, I wasn't
> impressed by the overall code quality....
>
> - Ted
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ext3-users mailing list
> Ext3-users redhat com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ex> t3-users
>
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]