[gpfsug-discuss] [External] changes

Simon Thompson s.j.thompson at bham.ac.uk
Mon Jan 17 12:27:34 GMT 2022

My guess is … they decided it was unsafe. I’m sure I’ve seen a few release notes that have referred to mmfsck and data corruption.


So maybe it was classified as too dangerous to leave in the field?


From: gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org <gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org> on behalf of Jonathan Buzzard <jonathan.buzzard at strath.ac.uk>
Date: Friday, 14 January 2022 at 14:38
To: gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] [External] changes
On 13/01/2022 17:39, mark.bergman at uphs.upenn.edu wrote:
> The change that I noticed most was:
>          Repair functionality of mmfsck command in online mode is deprecated
>              The repair functionality of mmfsck command in online mode is no longer available. The report-only operation still works in the online mode.
> While I know that mmfsck is rarely needed and has gotten much faster, deprecating the ability to do any online repairs seems
> like a significant regression.

I would concur with that sentiment, and given it is a significant
regression I would suggest that it IBM should give an explanation as to
why functionality has been removed.

Been able to do online repairs on large file systems is when you need it
a complete life saver. It could be the difference between several days
of outage vs. end users not realizing there was even a problem.


Jonathan A. Buzzard                         Tel: +44141-5483420
HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt.
University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20220117/7eeab996/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the gpfsug-discuss mailing list