View Single Post
Old 08-29-2012, 08:47 AM  
notjoe
Confirmed User
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 5,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spudstr View Post
Customer has backups, we can perform a full bare metal restore and restore their server to new equipment, that isn't the problem. The problem is the large amount of data being restored if we needed to would take.. many many hours to restore... So yes everything is in place for hardware failures etc, there is a hard choice to make and to figure out what will take less time to resolve, letting a server finish its simple check desk routine .. or restore it.. in this case.. letting it finish its check disk was the optimal solution..

And as I write this the customers server is back online and functioning just fine.

For those of you who don't know what fsck is, it is a utility short for file system check, it checks the drive for bad sectors, bad inodes, bad mappings to inodes etc. The slower the drives and greater amount of data you have the longer this process takes, its a 5 step process. In specific situations the linux operating system _forces_ you to do this. This is due to a file system being journalized.

Sure there are alternative file systems that do not have journalized file systems like ext3/4 suchs as riserFS or XFS. but frankly those are a bit inferior for day to day operation and have their own specific uses.

I love your bandwidth, your network, and how quickly you guys reply to my tickets. I do manage my own servers and fix my own problems.

Something you might want to look in to for this clown of a customer is ZFS. I use it on 12TB+ storage arrays. Love it. Would never go back, and the incremental snapshots are a huge plus!
notjoe is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote