Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*mkfs\.xfs\s+created\s+filesystem\s+larger\s+than\s+underlying\s+device\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*mkfs\.xfs\s+created\s+filesystem\s+larger\s+than\s+underlying\s+device\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Michael Moody <michael@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:48:16 -0700; Hello all. I recently created an XFS filesystem on an x86_64 CentOS 5.3 system. I used all tools in the repository: Xfsprogs-2.9.4-1 Kernel 2.6.18-128.1.10.el5.centos.plus It is a somewhat complex co; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00300.html (12,022 bytes)
2. Re: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:24:55 -0500; I'm guessing that this is df rounding up. Try df w/o -h, to see how many 1k blocks you have and compare that to the size. If it still looks wrong, can you include xfs_info output for /mnt/Volume1 as; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00302.html (10,895 bytes)
3. RE: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Michael Moody <michael@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:26:47 -0700; It still looks wrong: [root@filer5 /]# xfs_info /mnt/Volume1/ meta-data=/dev/Volume1-Rep-Store/Volume1-Replicated isize=256 agcount=32, agsize=146716768 blks = sectsz=512 attr=0 data = bsize=4096 blo; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00303.html (14,250 bytes)
4. RE: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Michael Moody <michael@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:33:38 -0700; In addition: I experienced significant corruption. I had only about 3 files on the XFS filesystem, which was then exported via nfs. I ran nfs_stress.sh against it, and my files ended up corrupt, and; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00304.html (12,712 bytes)
5. Re: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:02:31 -0500; 4694936576*4096 = 19230460215296 ... 18779615232*1024 = 19230325997568 ... 18779746304*1024 = 19230460215296 so in bytes, xfs_info says: 19230460215296 /proc/partitions says: 19230460215296 (same as; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00305.html (10,501 bytes)
6. RE: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Michael Moody <michael@xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:05:00 -0700; Are there still known issues with NFS and XFS? I'm performing the same test against a jfs formatted filesystem (exported via NFS), and so far, no issues. This is the latest centosplus kernel. Are the; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00306.html (12,591 bytes)
7. Re: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:06:51 -0500; Not that I know of. Without details about what was corrupt, what xfs_repair said, what dmesg said, what sysrq-t said, etc. it's hard to say. Could be 4k stack problems if it's x86. -Eric; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00307.html (9,208 bytes)
8. RE: mkfs.xfs created filesystem larger than underlying device (score: 1): Author: pg_xf2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Peter Grandi); Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:33:44 +0100; One of the values of the XFS mailing list is the entertainment provided by some (many) of the posts. This is one of the best. Even better. (the purpose of this message is not just to give thanks for; /archives/xfs/2009-06/msg00319.html (9,829 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]