Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>]

Ludek Finstrle wrote:
> > > 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
Ok, nothing odd about isize, sectsize, bsize.... thanks.


> > 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.
Ah, I suppose not :)

> I'm sorry, I don't have enough time till Friday. Then I'll try to play
> with the problem.
Thanks, I appreciate it... we're trying to reproduce it here.

-Eric