On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 at 12:49, Dave Chinner wrote:
Ah, thanks. It's not in -rc4 yet, will it be included in the next release?
> > PS: Why is the inode shown in hex and not in decimal? Would something
> > like this do:
> Because I find that large inode numbers in hex are much easier to
> understand than huge decimal numbers. The inode number is a direct
> encoding of it's location on disk and these days I can generally
> decode them in my head direct from the hex value.
Hehe, OK. Will learn how to do that too :-)
> IOWs, the first
> thing I almost always do when looking at an inode number is convert
> it to hex, so I don't see any point in printing them in decimal...
I was tempted to "find . -inum" to find out which data might be in trouble
but then noticed that I had to convert it to decimal first.
> e.g. without knowing the geometry of the filesystem, I'd guess that
> inode 0x401afe0 is inode 0x20 (32) of an inode allocation chunk,
> it's AG 2, 4, 8 or 16 (depends on the size of the AGs), and the
> block offset into the AG is 0xd7e (agbno 3454). From that I know a
> lot about the inode - it's the first in an inode cluster buffer and
> the other inodes reported are in the same buffer hence it's only one
> one busy buffer that caused the warnings, the agbno is small so it's
> near the start of the AG so there probably aren't a large number of
> inodes in the filesystem, etc.
Wow, OK. I respectfully withdraw my proposal then. Thanks for the
BOFH excuse #267:
The UPS is on strike.