Bug 1721973

Summary:	fsck.gfs2 is too slow
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8	Reporter:	Andrew Price <anprice>
Component:	gfs2-utils	Assignee:	Andrew Price <anprice>
Status:	ASSIGNED ---	QA Contact:	cluster-qe <cluster-qe>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	8.0	CC:	cluster-maint, gfs2-maint, nstraz, ovasik, rhandlin, sbradley, slevine, swhiteho
Target Milestone:	rc	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	8.2
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	1451449
Clones:	1738682 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2022-08-01 07:27:51 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1717513, 1451449, 1738682

Description Andrew Price 2019-06-19 10:33:22 UTC

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1451449 +++

Description of problem:

Checking a 300TB file system which is 80% full can take a full week with an average throughput of 5-10MB/s.

Comment 5 Steve Whitehouse 2020-05-11 10:19:57 UTC

This is going to be at least 8.4 at this stage.

Comment 9 Andrew Price 2020-11-12 15:26:10 UTC

*** Bug 1451443 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 RHEL Program Management 2021-02-01 07:41:35 UTC

After evaluating this issue, there are no plans to address it further or fix it in an upcoming release.  Therefore, it is being closed.  If plans change such that this issue will be fixed in an upcoming release, then the bug can be reopened.

Comment 12 Andrew Price 2021-02-01 09:30:53 UTC

This still needs to be addressed but the new process is to have longer-term work tracked upstream so we'll take it there and bring it back to Bugzilla and/or Jira once an upstream solution is baked.

Comment 17 RHEL Program Management 2021-08-01 07:27:06 UTC

After evaluating this issue, there are no plans to address it further or fix it in an upcoming release.  Therefore, it is being closed.  If plans change such that this issue will be fixed in an upcoming release, then the bug can be reopened.

Comment 18 Steve Whitehouse 2021-08-01 08:51:01 UTC

Reopening as this is being actively worked on

Comment 21 RHEL Program Management 2022-02-01 07:27:24 UTC

After evaluating this issue, there are no plans to address it further or fix it in an upcoming release.  Therefore, it is being closed.  If plans change such that this issue will be fixed in an upcoming release, then the bug can be reopened.

Comment 24 RHEL Program Management 2022-08-01 07:27:51 UTC

After evaluating this issue, there are no plans to address it further or fix it in an upcoming release.  Therefore, it is being closed.  If plans change such that this issue will be fixed in an upcoming release, then the bug can be reopened.