xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: unable to use xfs_repair

To: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: unable to use xfs_repair
From: Sidik Isani <lksi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 22:41:18 -1000
Cc: Sidik Isani <lksi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20021004090036.036b5728@pop.xs4all.nl>; from knuffie@xs4all.nl on Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 09:04:33AM +0200
References: <20021003170436.A11748@cfht.hawaii.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20021004090036.036b5728@pop.xs4all.nl>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 09:04:33AM +0200, Seth Mos wrote:
> At 17:04 3-10-2002 -1000, Sidik Isani wrote:
> >Oct  3 16:32:10 pelmo kernel: Out of Memory: Killed process 806 (xfs_repair).
> >
> >Hello again -
> >
> >   We have a bit of a problem: we have needs for very large filesystems
> >   (more than 1 TB) but no need to scale the memory in the machines
> >   the same way ... except if you ever need to run xfs_repair on the
> >   filesystem, it seems!
> 
> That isn't right. Can you run it through strace and get the top and bottom 
> part?

  Yes.  I put the whole thing at:

http://software.cfht.hawaii.edu/xfs_repair.strace.gz

  Memory usage actually jumped to almost 800 MB right away and stayed
  there for a while.  Then it went back under 10 MB, and then to 30
  for a while before exiting.

> >   I picked up a recent version of xfs_repair (2.3.3 that I got out of
> >   CVS a few days ago) and it consumes all of 1 GB and never finishes
> >   repairing.  I can't add more swap space in a *file*, so ... well,
> >   this is a bit awkward.  Is it normal for xfs_repair to consume that
> >   much memory, and can anything be done about it?  Is there something
> >   strange about my filesystem causing xfs_repair to leak possibly?
> 
> There have been multiple fixes in both the recovery part and the xfs_repair 
> utility and their memory usage. I have never seen this happen before.
> 
> The other developers might be able to understand a strace.
> 
> >   Ok, I scrounged some other partitions and converted them into swap,
> >   but if this is normal I guess we should consider splitting in the
> >   future to avoid grid-lock.  Don't make an FS that > 1000 times
> >   available RAM?  Seems nicer if we can avoid that, what do you think
> >   the practical limitations are?
> 
> There are a number of users out there with really large partitions that 
> don't see it. How much ram does the machine actually have?

  1 GB.  I added another 1.8 GB of swap, and then xfs_repair was
  completed in a reasonable amount of time.  We know not to partition
  less than .1% of the disk as swap now.  That's not such a sacrifice,
  and xfs_repair is happy.  There may be good reasons it needs to
  grab 800 MB... it's a pretty huge filesystem.  I just wanted to
  make sure?

Be seeing you,

- Sidik


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>