Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*possible\s+xfs\s+corruption\s*$/: 11 ]

Total 11 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Possible XFS Corruption (score: 1)
Author: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 15:48:54 +1000
Oh? I would be surprised if they had. A more likely source of problems would be changes in the VM subsystem (XFS metadata buffers are cached in the page cache). The failure you see is XFS reporting c
/archives/xfs/2004-08/msg00003.html (8,663 bytes)

2. Re: Possible XFS Corruption (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 15:48:54 +1000
Oh? I would be surprised if they had. A more likely source of problems would be changes in the VM subsystem (XFS metadata buffers are cached in the page cache). The failure you see is XFS reporting c
/archives/xfs/2004-08/msg00214.html (8,663 bytes)

3. possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: blacknred <leo1783@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 03:49:49 -0800 (PST)
Hi... I'm stuck with a storage issue on reboot. Initially doubted the storage, but dmesg throws these errors. Now wondering whether this is a fs issue? Any thoughts as to whats going on here? XFS: fa
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00094.html (7,818 bytes)

4. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 15:10:39 +0100
Le Tue, 7 Dec 2010 03:49:49 -0800 (PST) blacknred <leo1783@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait: It looks like a part of the filesystem is physically missing. What is the underlying device? Apparently it's a Smar
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00096.html (8,122 bytes)

5. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: blacknred <leo1783@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 07:11:04 -0800 (PST)
Yes, It's a Smart Array in HP Proliant Server. No power failure, just upgraded the controller firmware and rebooted the server..... -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/possible-xfs
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00097.html (8,877 bytes)

6. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 16:42:27 +0100
Le Tue, 7 Dec 2010 07:11:04 -0800 (PST) blacknred <leo1783@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait: Hu oh, that stinks. Nothing in the firmware release notes? Do you have any other filesystem on this array? First yo
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00098.html (8,499 bytes)

7. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: blacknred <leo1783@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 09:30:23 -0800 (PST)
It's all xfs..... and didn't see any I/O errors as well...except that dmesg is flooded with similar traces to one i posted.... -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/possible-xfs-corr
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00102.html (9,340 bytes)

8. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 12:15:54 -0600
blacknred put forth on 12/7/2010 11:30 AM: Out of the blue, one OP, with two Proliant servers having storage problems, within hours of one another, the same day? Long odds, that. Did you walk a mile,
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00104.html (8,341 bytes)

9. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 20:32:53 +0100
What Server, controller, and from which firmware version did you go to which one? -- mit freundlichen Grüssen, Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc it-management Internet Services: Protéger http://proteger.at
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00106.html (9,165 bytes)

10. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 09:10:09 +1100
Which indicates that the head and/or the tail of the log are not valid. Can you provide the output of: So we can see what the head/tail values are in the log? CentOS kernel? How old? Cheers, Dave. --
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00108.html (8,508 bytes)

11. Re: possible xfs corruption (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 21:44:14 -0600
Assuning it's centos5, there's really no need to be using an xfs kmod there anymore, the module shipped with the kernel in recent versions of the OS is really the one you want to use. That kmod is an
/archives/xfs/2010-12/msg00123.html (9,586 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu