+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #736156 +++ This bug is for gfs -- 736155 is for gfs2. +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #736155 +++ For RHEL 6.3, follow up on this XCHAT exchange with Bob Peterson: <bob> I'm reasonably sure we normally don't recommend a GFS volume be checked at boot time. But where is that documented? <slevine> I don't remember that in particular, which makes me think it's not in the regular GFS manual, but I can search around. <bob> Hm... <slevine> That's the sort of thing that sometimes is buried somewhere in a kBase article... <bob> Indeed <slevine> GFS or GFS2 or either? <bob> Well, there's a guy asking about GFS (1) in particular <slevine> that limits my search. <bob> Maybe I should ask one of the GSS guys <bob> They probably know the kbase stuff better <bob> It's interesting that it's not in the GFS manuals...maybe should be.../me shrugs <slevine> We do say that Running the gfs_fsck command on a very large file system can take a long time and consume a large amount of memory <slevine> We talk about how to determine how much memory it will require. <slevine> But that's all I can find in the GFS manual. <bob> hm, okay, thanks for looking <bob> slevine: fyi: Looks like I added notes on it to fsck.gfs2's man page <slevine> Should I add that to the regular doc? I could get it in by 5.8 and 6.3. <bob> I dunno. <bob> I think maybe we should add something, even if it's minimal. <bob> Maybe just one of those "Caution" boxes regarding GFS and GFS2 in /etc/fstab <bob> It should say something like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732921#c4 <slevine> I'll try to file bzs on this sometime today (before I close this IRC window...) <bob> Thanks Steven --- Additional comment from slevine on 2011-09-06 16:36:39 EDT --- This should be the same warning for 5.8 as for 6.3.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0176.html