[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr
From: Ludek Finstrle <ludek.finstrle@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:03:38 +0200
Cc: Mathieu Betrancourt <mbetrancourt@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4341E780.70803@xxxxxxx>
References: <20050926071451.GA3751@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4338128F.8000707@xxxxxxx> <20050927163531.GA19652@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <433976C5.1000104@xxxxxxx> <20050929054410.GA30789@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051001091130.GA15808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <434174A7.6010904@xxxxxxx> <26743c10510031244x726ff508m89ecd0398417e521@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4341E780.70803@xxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i
> >I have the same problem on a xfs on a raid 1 device (mdraid), wich is 
> >almost
> >full (97%)
> >and not on other non raid devices (and unfortunately not almost full).

I have raid 1 over raid 0 (it's together raid 10).

It's 55% full now. But it was 99% full few months ago. And there were
errors in dmesg log. Unfortunetly I don't have them :-(
/dev/md9               56G   31G   25G  55% /export

> >This problem appeared under Fedora3 and Suse9.3

I have this problem under RedHat 7.2.

> >Here's the output of xfs_info for the problematic one :

Here is my xfs_info:
# xfs_info /dev/md9
meta-data=/                      isize=256    agcount=8, agsize=163856 blks
         =                       sectsz=512  
data     =                       bsize=4096   blocks=1310752, imaxpct=25
         =                       sunit=16     swidth=32 blks, unwritten=0
naming   =version 2              bsize=4096  
log      =internal               bsize=4096   blocks=1200, version=1
         =                       sectsz=512   sunit=0 blks
realtime =none                   extsz=131072 blocks=0, rtextents=0

> It would also be interesting to see the xfs_repair output, and xfs_bmap 
> (-v and -a) output of the problematic files prior to running xfs_fsr, if 
> possible.

I don't know which files will be problematic after xfs_fsr.

I'm sorry, I don't have enough time till Friday. Then I'll try to play
with the problem.



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