Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 11:34:10AM -0500, John Kihonge wrote:
> > We are working to try and determine what might be happening and to help you
> > restore the data. The backup may not be lost and you may be able to recover
> > the files you want. The problem you are having may have nothing to do with
> > the online database. We are working hard at it and we will get back to you
> > early next week.
> Sounds great.
> I gathered a bit more information.
> I log all my backups in a written journal, and this backup is number 23,
> dated 16 April 2002.
> My current kernel is dated 1 May 2002, so it's looking like the backup
> was done under XFS 1.0, kernel 2.4.16, and glibc 2.2.3. My first move to
> an XFS kernel was 24 August 2001, with whatever was current at the time,
> and all filesystems date from that time. However, I really don't believe
> the kernel the dump was performed under matters.
> I have my old kernels saved if you need any symbol information from
> I have attempted to restore a November backup, and I believe the same problem
> exists. xfsrestore will report something like this:
> xfsrestore: 1085 directories and 14713 entries processed
> ...and will restore the 1085 directories, but only a fraction of the
> entries. I assume that entries == files.
> In this testing, I'm just doing level 0 dumps with a command like:
> % xfsrestore -f /dev/nst0 /u/restore
> On a dump dated 9 November I restored / which gave me all the
> directories and 1663 files out of ~4000 entries. The next
> restore was for /home, 1085 directories and 14713 entries,
> and it failed with the following error:
> xfsrestore: examining media file 3
> xfsrestore: seeking past media file directory dump
> xfsrestore: drive_scsitape.c:1507: do_next_mark: Assertion
> `rechdrp->first_mark_offset - rechdrp->file_offset <= ( off64_t )(
> contextp->dc_recsz )' failed.
If the problem is just the assertion one, it maybe that you are restoring an old
dump (dumped prior to a fix for xfsdump-1.1.10 of 10th December 2001).
The mail archive:
has an explanation of the problem and the suggested fix to allow one to restore
such a dump.
I hope that will fix the problem.
> I thought it might be useful to re-create this problem with an older
> Let me know if any other information would be useful.