From: Robert W. <ro...@us...> - 2003-05-27 21:03:11
|
The 'fsstress' test is probably what you are looking for. I've used it= a few times myself for filesystem testing, and it was able to "successful= ly" uncover bugs for me. -Robbie Robert V. Williamson <ro...@us...> Linux Test Project IBM Linux Technology Center Phone: (512) 838-9295 T/L: 678-9295 Fax: (512) 838-4603 Web: http://ltp.sourceforge.net IRC: #ltp on freenode.irc.net =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'= m not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein = = "Travis, Mark" = = <mt...@cy...> To: "'ltp-= li...@li...'" <ltp...@li...> = Sent by: cc: = = ltp...@li...ur Subject: [LTP] = Filesystem Resilience? = ceforge.net = = = = = = 05/27/2003 03:44 PM = = = = Hello.=A0 I'm looking for a good way to test that a filesystem comes ba= ck clean after a dirty shutdown.=A0 I'm in the process of testing suitabil= ity of network raid with MD and ENBD (http://www.it.uc3m.es/~ptb/nbd/).=A0 The= filesystem I'm using is JFS, and the raw devices come from LVM.=A0 I'm filesystem agnostic.=A0 JFS seems fine so I'll use it unless there's a = good reason to switch. Anyway, what I'd like to do is test how well my ENBD-exported device fa= res in the event of a dirty shutdown on the primary.=A0 Supposedly, the dat= a should be identical on both sides.=A0 From what I've tested so far usin= g simple scripts that write and sync data it has appeared to work pretty = well -- the network-accessible mirror comes up very nicely.=A0 However, what= I would like to do is put the system under the type of duress that would = most likely trigger such things as a corrupted journal or something else whi= ch would make it difficult, if not impossible, to recover the filesystem a= fter a dirty shutdown. Is fsstress a good way to do this?=A0 Does anybody on the list use LTP = for this type of testing? Thank you very much for any assistance! Mark Travis mt...@cy... = |