Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94800133740B for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:49:48 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.251]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18626-02-2 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:49:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: delayed 00:26:37.359732 by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from 26.mail-out.ovh.net (2.26.mail-out.ovh.net [178.33.107.8]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B3051337C31 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:48:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: (qmail 28993 invoked by uid 503); 18 Apr 2011 20:48:46 -0000 Received: from b9.ovh.net (HELO mail615.ha.ovh.net) (213.186.33.59) by 26.mail-out.ovh.net with SMTP; 18 Apr 2011 20:48:46 -0000 Received: from b0.ovh.net (HELO queueout) (213.186.33.50) by b0.ovh.net with SMTP; 18 Apr 2011 23:21:57 +0200 Received: from par69-8-88-161-102-87.fbx.proxad.net (HELO apollo13) (lists%peufeu.com@88.161.102.87) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 18 Apr 2011 23:21:56 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, "Ireneusz Pluta" Subject: Re: Background fsck References: <4D9CEA3F.5050603@wp.pl> <201104071701.02647.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> <4D9EA367.7060102@wp.pl> <201104080919.43152.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> <4D9EF6E3.9010402@wp.pl> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 23:21:56 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "Pierre C" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4D9EF6E3.9010402@wp.pl> User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.01 (Linux) X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 12354499678046979633 X-Ovh-Remote: 88.161.102.87 (par69-8-88-161-102-87.fbx.proxad.net) X-Ovh-Local: 213.186.33.20 (ns0.ovh.net) X-Spam-Check: DONE|U 0.5/N X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201104/256 X-Sequence-Number: 43318 > What's more, this is already a new controller. It replaced the previous > one because of exactly the same persisting problem. I think tech support > people not knowing a solution just buy some time for them and say "flash > this beta firmware maybe it helps" or "replace your hardware". We had a problem like this on a server a few years ago on the job... The machine randomly crashed once a month. XFS coped alright until, one day, it threw the towel, and the poor maintenance guys needed to run xfsrepair. Needless to say, the machine crashed again while xfsrepair was running concurrently on all filesystems. All filesystems were then completely trashed... That convinced the boss maybe something was wrong and a new box was rushed in... Then a few tens of terabytes of backup restoration ... zzzzzz .... It turned out it was a faulty SCSI cable.