On 09/14/2016 02:55 PM, Ilya Dryomov wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Nikolay Borisov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On 09/14/2016 09:55 AM, Adrian Saul wrote: >>> >>> I found I could ignore the XFS issues and just mount it with the >>> appropriate options (below from my backup scripts): >>> >>> # >>> # Mount with nouuid (conflicting XFS) and norecovery (ro snapshot) >>> # >>> if ! mount -o ro,nouuid,norecovery $SNAPDEV /backup${FS}; then >>> echo "FAILED: Unable to mount snapshot $DATESTAMP of $FS - >>> cleaning up" >>> rbd unmap $SNAPDEV >>> rbd snap rm ${RBDPATH}@${DATESTAMP} >>> exit 3; >>> fi >>> echo "Backup snapshot of $RBDPATH mounted at: /backup${FS}" >>> >>> It's impossible without clones to do it without norecovery. >> >> But shouldn't freezing the fs and doing a snapshot constitute a "clean >> unmount" hence no need to recover on the next mount (of the snapshot) - >> Ilya? > > I *thought* it should (well, except for orphan inodes), but now I'm not > sure. Have you tried reproducing with loop devices yet?
Here is what the checksum tests showed: fsfreeze -f /mountpoit md5sum /dev/rbd0 f33c926373ad604da674bcbfbe6460c5 /dev/rbd0 rbd snap create xx@xxx && rbd snap protect xx@xxx rbd map xx@xxx md5sum /dev/rbd1 6f702740281874632c73aeb2c0fcf34a /dev/rbd1 where rbd1 is a snapshot of the rbd0 device. So the checksum is indeed different, worrying. > > Thanks, > > Ilya > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
