xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr

To: Ludek Finstrle <ludek.finstrle@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 14:37:26 -0500
Cc: Mathieu Betrancourt <mbetrancourt@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20051004190338.GA15263@soptik.pzkagis.cz>
References: <20050926071451.GA3751@soptik.pzkagis.cz> <4338128F.8000707@sgi.com> <20050927163531.GA19652@soptik.pzkagis.cz> <433976C5.1000104@sgi.com> <20050929054410.GA30789@soptik.pzkagis.cz> <20051001091130.GA15808@soptik.pzkagis.cz> <434174A7.6010904@sgi.com> <26743c10510031244x726ff508m89ecd0398417e521@mail.gmail.com> <4341E780.70803@sgi.com> <20051004190338.GA15263@soptik.pzkagis.cz>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206)
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


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