| 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.
Thanks
Luf
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: The XFS real-time subvolume in Linux, Steve Lord |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr, Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |