X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0-rupdated (updated) on oss.sgi.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.3.0-rupdated Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id mBLMF38t025454 for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 16:15:03 -0600 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1229897700-197a01080000-NocioJ X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from mail-bw0-f10.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id B46193C80D for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-bw0-f10.google.com (mail-bw0-f10.google.com [209.85.218.10]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2DjlMxNGnC9Bxb9L for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:15:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by bwz3 with SMTP id 3so3747044bwz.20 for ; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:14:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=dAbWwo0/O0AytE5EgoVQiEZ2nCu31lNCxZ/bLI7EW2M=; b=J/wHDowxGAy49zP3ElPFTRY4MpBQLm0suNlnbHgcUIGtYDS0jycVgu2BnVReftyCEO cQ5wG9c3XrcFOQCTKFEQZXa7C5WYtuA1a1kLV9vTPw9AiDVHPbaMajY43SyiVtMoQ5dp YAYLFb32NJWtH/Q/x+HR8U53vv2Pnq+RFLzDY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=BKNPhLIcTOS2tAeP67lvcp7Cd0N9Ar0LD/EMglvDqqZQaCZEyrEkFE6CQP9hKcsDm7 j7J03sy4kWdeNhFLdS8g9hRCxIHTHHjNzp39ITH3l7bLpjXx44PaHfbSgk3+cCE4ZpF1 S448LBEL9pmez1NtPU5uDFuoB8KlN3zDWdVws= Received: by 10.181.135.5 with SMTP id m5mr2056864bkn.87.1229897699913; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:14:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.233.11 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:14:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <7bcfcfff0812211414g60acd6c3reacf785cbf6f3823@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 17:14:59 -0500 From: "David Bernick" To: "Eric Sandeen" X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: xfs_repair problem. Subject: Re: xfs_repair problem. Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com In-Reply-To: <7bcfcfff0812211408u6e08bf81r1c19ab5ba938b0e2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7bcfcfff0812210703r4bd889cave8e2d60c56587e3e@mail.gmail.com> <494E66D9.5030704@sandeen.net> <7bcfcfff0812210852v6c1cd522i334de914e1e9a112@mail.gmail.com> <494E766B.5080102@sandeen.net> <7bcfcfff0812211408u6e08bf81r1c19ab5ba938b0e2@mail.gmail.com> X-Barracuda-Connect: mail-bw0-f10.google.com[209.85.218.10] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1229897701 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0419 1.0000 -1.7513 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-1.75 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=2.1 tests=HTML_MESSAGE X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.1.13310 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-length: 4685 and: are you available for professional services to help us on this problem? Oh, and: [root@luceneindex1-nap ~]# xfs_info /var/mnt/v5Docs/ meta-data=/dev/docs/v5Docs isize=256 agcount=97, agsize=67108864 blks = sectsz=512 attr=0 data = bsize=4096 blocks=6444900352, imaxpct=25 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks, unwritten=1 naming =version 2 bsize=4096 log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=32768, version=1 = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=0 realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 5:08 PM, David Bernick wrote: > So I ran an xfs_repair -v on my filesystem. While the FS was originally 12T > and 95% full. I ran xfs_repair and it throw many "out of space errors" when > it was running. That makes some sense. > > I expanded it with a new device with xfs_grow. It seems to work, because > the disk is now bigger when I mount it. > > When I ran xfs_repair on that (latest version), it reverts back to the > original size. Is there anything I need to do to make the xfs_growfs > permanent? > > If I can make the XFS partition bigger, I can likely make it work because > then it won't run out of space! But the partition, despite saying its > "bigger" here, doesn't seem to "take" after the xfs_repair. Any ideas? > > Below is the xfs_db and some other useful things. > 8 17 12695312483 sdb1 > 8 33 8803844062 sdc1 > 8 34 4280452000 sdc2 > > --- Logical volume --- > LV Name /dev/docs/v5Docs > VG Name docs > LV UUID G85Zi9-s63C-yWrU-yyf0-STP6-YOhJ-6Ne3pS > LV Write Access read/write > LV Status available > # open 1 > LV Size 24.01 TB > Current LE 6293848 > Segments 3 > Allocation inherit > Read ahead sectors auto > - currently set to 256 > Block device 253:5 > xfs_db> sb 0 > xfs_db> print > magicnum = 0x58465342 > blocksize = 4096 > dblocks = 6444900352 > rblocks = 0 > rextents = 0 > uuid = f086bb71-d67b-4cc1-b622-1f10349e6a49 > logstart = 1073741828 > rootino = 128 > rbmino = 129 > rsumino = 130 > rextsize = 1 > agblocks = 67108864 > agcount = 97 > rbmblocks = 0 > logblocks = 32768 > versionnum = 0x3084 > sectsize = 512 > inodesize = 256 > inopblock = 16 > fname = "\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\000" > blocklog = 12 > sectlog = 9 > inodelog = 8 > inopblog = 4 > agblklog = 26 > rextslog = 0 > inprogress = 0 > imax_pct = 25 > icount = 149545792 > ifree = 274 > fdblocks = 4275133930 > frextents = 0 > uquotino = 0 > gquotino = 0 > qflags = 0 > flags = 0 > shared_vn = 0 > inoalignmt = 2 > unit = 0 > width = 0 > dirblklog = 0 > logsectlog = 0 > logsectsize = 0 > logsunit = 0 > features2 = 0 > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> David Bernick wrote: >> > Thanks for the help so far: >> > >> > It my output was from "sb 0". Thanks for reminding me to be explicit. >> > >> > The system is a 64-bit system with 32-GB of RAM. It's going through the >> > FS right now with XFS repair. >> > Output of xfs_repair says, "arno=3" and about 81.6% of RAM is used by >> > the process. Think 32 G will be enough to handle this task? >> > I actually don't KNOW the original error, unfortunately, when growing. I >> > came into this late. >> > >> > We're using repair 2.9.4. Worth getting a more recent version? >> >> 2.9.8 had some memory usage improvements (reductions) for repair IIRC >> >> > Kernel is - 2.6.18-92.1.1.el5 >> >> heh; RHEL5 does not support xfs ;) >> >> You probably hit: >> >> TAKE 959978 - growing an XFS filesystem by more than 2TB is broken >> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2007-01/msg00053.html >> >> I'd see if you can get centos to backport that fix (I assume you're >> using centos or at least their kernel module; if not you can backport it >> yourself...) >> >> > I "backed off" by vgsplit-ing the new physical device from the original >> > vgroup, so I was left with my original partition. I am hoping to mount >> > the original device since the "expanded" fs didn't work. I am hoping >> > xfs_repair helps that. >> >> well, you don't want to take out part of the device if the fs thinks it >> owns it now, but from the db output I think you still have the smaller >> size. >> >> I'd read through: >> >> http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2008-01/msg00085.html >> >> and see if it helps you recover. >> >> -Eric >> > > [[HTML alternate version deleted]]