[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfs_force_shutdown called from file fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c

To: Linux XFS <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfs_force_shutdown called from file fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c
From: Federico Sevilla III <jijo@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:00:51 +0800
In-reply-to: <20090224224636.GF26138@disturbed>
Organization: F S 3 Consulting Inc.
References: <1235480661.17293.28.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090224224636.GF26138@disturbed>
On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 09:46 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 09:04:21PM +0800, Federico Sevilla III wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Recently, we had two file servers crash during periods of increased load
> > (increased access from workstations in the LAN). After the crash, the
> > XFS file systems would no longer mount. The mount process would just
> > stay in state D, with no progress, and no significant disk activity.
> What was the cause of the crash?

The engineers on site were unable to copy the exact error message, but
whatever could be read of a photograph of the screen seems to point to
similar issues with xfs_trans_read_buf error 5 as we're beginning to see

We are unsure of the cause of the crash but know that the system load
was higher than usual because of some larger files that people were busy
working on at the time.

> >         attempt to access beyond end of device
> >         sda7: rw=0, want=154858897362229008, limit=3885978852
> >         I/O error in filesystem ("sda7") meta-data dev sda7 block 
> > 0x2262b58bf959708       ("xfs_trans_read_buf") error 5 buf count 4096
> A corrupted extent pointer of some kind. xfs_repair should have
> found this. Can you run xfs_repair again? If it doesn't find
> anything, please upgrade xfs_repair to the latest version and
> try again.

Will do, and will revert to the list again with the results.

> > Both servers use CentOS5 with the Linux 2.6.18-92.1.22.el5 kernel. For
> Oh. XFS is not really supported on that platform because it is pretty much
> completely untested on RHEL based kernels.

What would be the "community endorsed" approach to using our favorite
file system on CentOS 5? Would you recommend we go with the CentOSPlus
kernels instead?

Thank you very much.


Federico Sevilla III
F S 3 Consulting Inc.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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