From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 18 01:33:35 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61F5E16A41F for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 01:33:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from user@dhp.com) Received: from shell.dhp.com (shell.dhp.com [199.245.105.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FA543D46 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 01:33:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from user@dhp.com) Received: by shell.dhp.com (Postfix, from userid 896) id 4025431316; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:33:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 20:33:29 -0500 (EST) From: user To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list (on a small FS) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 01:33:35 -0000 # time fsck -y /dev/aacd0s1e ** /dev/aacd0s1e ** Last Mounted on /mnt/data1 ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327585 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327586 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327588 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327589 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327592 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327597 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list 47.701u 6.659s 24:31.28 3.6% 90+384208k 0+7io 0pf+0w # Ok, I see in the archives some talk of this error: fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list and it revolved around a 2TB filesystem and perhaps not having sufficient memory to perform the fsck. However, my filesystem is: /dev/aacd0s1e 369189226 315687202 23966886 93% 42043399 5672951 88% /mnt/mount1 ... less than 400 GB. Further, I have 2 GB of real memory and 4 GB of swap. The system is a 6.0-RELEASE install. What can I do to get more visibility on this error - what diagnostics can I look at ? What is the solution to this problem ? Is there a way to run fsck and purposefully give it more resources ? Thank you. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 18 17:46:37 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00D5916A41F for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:46:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from user@dhp.com) Received: from shell.dhp.com (shell.dhp.com [199.245.105.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9223A43D48 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:46:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from user@dhp.com) Received: by shell.dhp.com (Postfix, from userid 896) id EF5043133D; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:46:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:46:35 -0500 (EST) From: Ensel Sharon To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: more on "fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list" - misleading clean/dirty status X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:46:37 -0000 Ok, in relation to my post yesterday, I have a filesystem in FreebSD 6.0-RELEASE that dies in its fsck with: fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list details are a ~380 GB filesystem, 2 GBs physical and 4 GBs swap memory. ----- Aside from the issue of this problem as a whole, I believe that I am also seeing bad and misleading behavior out of fsck. When the fsck exits with this error, the filesystem is no longer marked dirty, and I can mount and use the filesystem. However, I was suspicious, and the filesystem started behaving badly. That is when I discovered this: # time fsck -y /dev/aacd0s1e ** /dev/aacd0s1e ** Last Mounted on /mnt/mount1 ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327585 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327586 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327588 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327589 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327592 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327597 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list 47.670u 5.661s 23:51.74 3.7% 87+372707k 0+11io 0pf+0w # # # # time fsck -y /dev/aacd0s1e ** /dev/aacd0s1e ** Last Mounted on /mnt/mount1 ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327585 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327586 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327588 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327589 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327592 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327597 (4 should be 0) CORRECT? yes fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list 47.550u 7.415s 23:49.28 3.8% 88+379202k 0+4io 0pf+0w # See the problem ? fsck is not actually fixing any of the problems with the filesystem - the two successive fscks report fixing the exact same problems, and after reporting that, allow clean mounting of that filesystem - but as can be seen from above, not only does the fsck not finish (with a very ambiguous error, especially as relates to the seriousness of the error) but it does not actually perform any of the fixes it claims to. Is this indeed incorrect behavior ? In other fsck operations, such as interrupting fsck, I am clearly told that the filesystem is still dirty. In this case, it obviously still is, but nothing is said about it, and the operator is allowed to move forward with mount/use. I would think that at least a more verbose error is in order, perhaps in addition to alerting that the filesystem is in fact still dirty. Which is to say nothing of actually fixing the problem (which may in fact be a misconfiguration on my end, which I am hoping to discover in the other thread on this topic) Thanks. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 18 18:29:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5C716A41F for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:29:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D959F43D46 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:29:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k0IITMep012032; Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:29:22 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <43CE8903.7000300@centtech.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 12:29:23 -0600 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060112) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ensel Sharon References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1245/Wed Jan 18 10:57:44 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: more on "fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list" - misleading clean/dirty status X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:29:26 -0000 Ensel Sharon wrote: > Ok, in relation to my post yesterday, I have a filesystem in FreebSD > 6.0-RELEASE that dies in its fsck with: > > fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list > > details are a ~380 GB filesystem, 2 GBs physical and 4 GBs swap memory. > > ----- > > Aside from the issue of this problem as a whole, I believe that I am also > seeing bad and misleading behavior out of fsck. When the fsck exits with > this error, the filesystem is no longer marked dirty, and I can mount and > use the filesystem. However, I was suspicious, and the filesystem started > behaving badly. That is when I discovered this: > > > # time fsck -y /dev/aacd0s1e > ** /dev/aacd0s1e > ** Last Mounted on /mnt/mount1 > ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327585 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327586 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327588 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327589 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327592 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327597 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list > 47.670u 5.661s 23:51.74 3.7% 87+372707k 0+11io 0pf+0w > # > # > # > # time fsck -y /dev/aacd0s1e > ** /dev/aacd0s1e > ** Last Mounted on /mnt/mount1 > ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327585 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327586 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327588 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327589 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327592 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=37327597 (4 should be 0) > CORRECT? yes > > fsck_4.2bsd: cannot increase directory list > 47.550u 7.415s 23:49.28 3.8% 88+379202k 0+4io 0pf+0w > # > > > > See the problem ? fsck is not actually fixing any of the problems with > the filesystem - the two successive fscks report fixing the exact same > problems, and after reporting that, allow clean mounting of that > filesystem - but as can be seen from above, not only does the fsck not > finish (with a very ambiguous error, especially as relates to the > seriousness of the error) but it does not actually perform any of the > fixes it claims to. > It can't allocate enough memory to built a complete list of what inodes are used in what directories, etc, so it fails before getting to repair anything. > Is this indeed incorrect behavior ? In other fsck operations, such as > interrupting fsck, I am clearly told that the filesystem is still > dirty. In this case, it obviously still is, but nothing is said about it, > and the operator is allowed to move forward with mount/use. > > I would think that at least a more verbose error is in order, perhaps in > addition to alerting that the filesystem is in fact still dirty. Which is > to say nothing of actually fixing the problem (which may in fact be a > misconfiguration on my end, which I am hoping to discover in the other > thread on this topic) fsck will report the filesystem as clean when it indeed is marked clean. When you mounted the filesystem, and it let you, it's because you were previously running softupdates on the filesystem, and so it allows you to mount the filesystem even though it is dirty, so background fsck can fix anything that needs fixing. At this point, the filesystem should be in a consistant enough state for use, however some various things might not be perfect (which is why you'd still need to run fsck on it). You might want to update to 6-STABLE, just to get any recent filesystem fixes. I don't think you've hit anything major, except for possibly the nullfs stuff. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 01:33:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1A916A420 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:33:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pawciobiel@gmail.com) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93A3843D4C for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:33:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pawciobiel@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i31so364010wra for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:33:45 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=AicZwr0fYeIvqP0SFkDVw6ZRxsBkuimDG0XJELydKfXLN/VoIoLKg6lnmqCrXPgYJDHtxbMYyMsc6Uq/sNpBJn4h41E6pVvYTXX1mzQYU7VtbMscEqWL8iAvSbLcfzErDEoinioGwNRAhx1QSyWTVEOEA1EHhI0lTAIKLLYm53Q= Received: by 10.65.141.7 with SMTP id t7mr1109281qbn; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:33:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.102? ( [82.44.103.144]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id e18sm960762qba.2006.01.19.17.33.42; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:33:44 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <43D03E21.3060606@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:34:25 +0000 From: Pawel User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051217) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:33:47 -0000 Hi I have done backup my root,usr,var directorys using tar ( tar cvlzf -X exclude /usr/backup/root.tar /usr ), made bootable cd with backup on it. I then, decide to restore my system on a vergin drive and on another hdd which already contains old linux. So I've put in my vergin brand new disk in, boot freebsd from CD which contains my backup and typed: /sbin/fdisk -BI ad0 /sbin/disklabel -w -r -B ad0s1 auto # Copy blank label to tmp /sbin/disklabel ad0s1 > /tmp/saved_label # Add generic partition table from cd and re-apply to the disk cat ./partition_layout a: 130M 0 4.2BSD b: 512M * swap e: 256M * 4.2BSD f: 256M * 4.2BSD g: 100% * 4.2BSD /bin/cat /root/partition_layout >> /tmp/saved_label /sbin/disklabel -R ad0s1 /tmp/saved_label # Format the disk and enable auto-updates /sbin/newfs /dev/ad0s1a /sbin/newfs /dev/ad0s1e /sbin/newfs /dev/ad0s1f /sbin/newfs /dev/ad0s1g /sbin/tunefs -n enable /dev/ad0s1a /sbin/tunefs -n enable /dev/ad0s1e /sbin/tunefs -n enable /dev/ad0s1f /sbin/tunefs -n enable /dev/ad0s1g # Copying backup to drive /sbin/mount /dev/ad0s1a /mnt mkdir /mnt/var mkdir /mnt/usr /sbin/mount /dev/ad0s1e /mnt/var /sbin/mount /dev/ad0s1g /mnt/usr /sbin/mount /dev/ad0s1f /mnt/tmp /sbin/mount_cd9660 /dev/acd0a /mnt1 tar xvpf /mnt1/root.tar -C /mnt tar xvpf /mnt1/var.tar -C /mnt tar xvpzf /mnt1/usr.gzip -C /mnt ... reboot and it didn't worked on vergin disk but it worked on old one. I have tryed few other ideas like put some old hdd with M$ on it and after restore system boot. So I have put another brand new, vergin disk and it didn't. Any Suggestions? Regards, pawciob From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 01:52:47 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C739516A41F for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:52:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.102]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4FEBD43D46 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:52:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 44154 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Jan 2006 01:52:46 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=nT0h3jmLrROB1/ovJlBC2tKRkbO74cq8cL5COp6XdfKzjaKSbOy1tvSsGw+o8m0g9NNiMaFGmi5HLmhoCyzCosI+GR4g3kVvg6oTDM1kd51RO3/EGVeldQe146ILkCJ+iAJznrmsgI9ZKGOhoYRfL0L5mg2g0IgP9OLXgt5R3IU= ; Message-ID: <20060120015246.44152.qmail@web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [213.54.71.107] by web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:52:46 PST Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:52:46 -0800 (PST) From: Arne Woerner To: Pawel , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <43D03E21.3060606@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Re: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:52:47 -0000 --- Pawel wrote: > Any Suggestions? > Hmm... I would recommend to use boot0cfg -v -B -b /boot/boot0 ad0 to ad0, which might write a good MBR (master boot record to the very beginning of the disc). Maybe you want to try the other options, too... -Arne __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 07:01:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DB016A41F for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 07:01:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from non_secure@yahoo.com) Received: from web50908.mail.yahoo.com (web50908.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.38.128]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4C0B743D48 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 07:01:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from non_secure@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 80235 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Jan 2006 07:01:10 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=coJeLgagIgSdpxBhzLv5r6a5df8/5LBMDyiIMBfaUs7K5v1sKdSbdDlxe3kPHvq2+gkcn+0Itk89H938AZmL259UEYUGhrclilsuPpZ3zNgwT4h8XiDVl6g/QYw5NpdDS0IZ+Bh2jebRU9njS3LeIwvhBvnD2eeUwiMfE+4E9S0= ; Message-ID: <20060120070110.80233.qmail@web50908.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.94.196.84] by web50908.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:01:10 PST Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 23:01:10 -0800 (PST) From: Joe Schmoe To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: can snapshots become corrupted ? Is fsck'ing /dev/md0 sensible ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 07:01:11 -0000 I want to make this brief for you all ... Let's say I have a running filesystem, and the system crashes, and (for whatever reason) I mount and run the filesystem in an unclean state. While in this unclean, running state, I create a snapshot on it. Now let's say I unmount the filesystem and fsck it for real. It gets marked clean. Is the snapshot that resides on that filesystem still dirty ? If so, is it expected that use of the clean FS with the dirty snapshot enabled would cause system instability (hard lock of system). If so, is it sensible for me to mount the snapshot on md0 and fsck /dev/md0 ? thakns. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 13:48:23 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83B3F16A420 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:48:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8A4743D55 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:48:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A91092082; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:48:17 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Learn: ham X-Spam-Score: -3.2/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on tim.des.no Received: from xps.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by tim.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D9272081; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:48:17 +0100 (CET) Received: by xps.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 062B033C1D; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:48:16 +0100 (CET) To: Pawel References: <43D03E21.3060606@gmail.com> From: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:48:16 +0100 In-Reply-To: <43D03E21.3060606@gmail.com> (pawciobiel@gmail.com's message of "Fri, 20 Jan 2006 01:34:25 +0000") Message-ID: <86lkxbt3hb.fsf@xps.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:48:23 -0000 Pawel writes: > So I've put in my vergin brand new disk in, boot freebsd from CD which > contains my backup and typed: > [...] > reboot and it didn't worked on vergin disk but it worked on old one. "it didn't work" does not tell us anything about what went wrong. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 19:24:08 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC3E16A41F for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:24:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pawciobiel@gmail.com) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.195]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CD9043D6E for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:24:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pawciobiel@gmail.com) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i11so468358nzh for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:24:03 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=mddFFlaaJsrfnpsw1ZlTHaJqlvMpudnltN26wtFbiKJMDoxcrHhZTR2RVD/sihEdfFfP56MLNYvPMlaz3lSLy2k2e3DNsjT0lbs+Y4qEkctQoYV2eS3qxaMv0wJyz38ZwnCBryGYCl1p7+U680PlLP4t4Nij2Coo+UnJCzC/7oE= Received: by 10.64.251.4 with SMTP id y4mr1648332qbh; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:24:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.102? ( [82.44.103.144]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id m3sm1311866qbe.2006.01.20.11.24.02; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:24:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <43D138CB.2020909@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:23:55 +0000 From: Pawel User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051217) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <43D03E21.3060606@gmail.com> <86lkxbt3hb.fsf@xps.des.no> In-Reply-To: <86lkxbt3hb.fsf@xps.des.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:24:09 -0000 Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > "it didn't work" does not tell us anything about what went wrong. Sorry about that. The message was "Missing operation system"... (default MBR message) I've looked in "partition table" (from 446 to 512 of MBR) with dos disk editor (pq magic shows error code #110) and problem seems to be there. I still can non understand why fdisk have wrote wrong partition table or wrong info about beginning first partition/slice? I've even used boot0cfg to put boot0 in MBR and disklabel with boot1 boot2 but boot manager hangs on F1. (I shouldn't have "boot0 boot manager" for one partition should I?) And the worst thing is that after when I've made one fat32, active partition on this disk, move dos system on (sys a: c:), boot my backup-cd, restore backup the system boot properly! What is the difference between running two commands: fdisk -BI /dev/ad0 disklabel -w -r -B ad0s1 auto on virgin disk and used one? It should wrote partition table anyway, shouldn't it? Its seems to that "fdisk -BI /dev/ad0" is not creating proper partition table, right? confused pawcio From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 19:38:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F40216A41F for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:38:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 65C6443D75 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:37:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 38910 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Jan 2006 19:37:57 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=dpAY7B+IcSBgezR75MRyu9TtCUYoGCWQ56zNCygsp+ePVwxzT0GxhZV7AMfmSWdkLSRsuGr64lnO2Ujlq3+ub5y+Hv2GlxzDIv5JMkT8M9Vz/GbbWb4/f2f+BG+e3FGbfjtdRCSwHPWhOl57dGd++XoG8aPVBJZSaKyqWFB5t24= ; Message-ID: <20060120193757.38908.qmail@web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [213.54.71.107] by web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:37:57 PST Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:37:57 -0800 (PST) From: Arne Woerner To: Pawel , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <43D138CB.2020909@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Re: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:38:04 -0000 --- Pawel wrote: > And the worst thing is that after when > I've made one fat32, active partition on > this disk, move dos system on (sys a: c:), > boot my backup-cd, restore backup the > system boot properly! > Happy to read, that it boots now... :-) I "fought" a little bit with fdisk, boot0cfg and bsdlabel some weeks ago... It was quite weird... Somehow those 16 sectors were not there in the beginning of ad0s1; so I had to move the whole ad0s1a, because I mentioned that too late... ;-) Do you remember the output of % fdisk ad0 and %bsdlabel ad0s1 ? -Arne (who is confused, too) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 20:39:24 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A9E16A422 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:39:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pawciobiel@gmail.com) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.201]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42F9543D69 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:39:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pawciobiel@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i30so562257wra for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:39:14 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=X31A0kzZGiAt1SbW4cqlGy5bmBU1RDnCROYPTvUNYKv8vb92lt5ryiGKqzk9hiriccZntpiqw+dB4Vm9X2TaWjlHDMVETXUrgznMPUqQp3DowamAxN/nnu9xIh/ngoa9A++FD5OyPDdeUgVpF3UJfNIHRC0BKNTgr4AfVjf7jMs= Received: by 10.64.250.3 with SMTP id x3mr1819297qbh; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:39:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.102? ( [82.44.103.144]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id f17sm1542950qba.2006.01.20.12.39.13; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:39:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <43D14A6A.4060305@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:39:06 +0000 From: Pawel User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051217) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <20060120193757.38908.qmail@web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20060120193757.38908.qmail@web30304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 20:39:24 -0000 Arne Woerner wrote: > --- Pawel wrote: >> And the worst thing is that after when >> I've made one fat32, active partition on >> this disk, move dos system on (sys a: c:), >> boot my backup-cd, restore backup the >> system boot properly! >> > Happy to read, that it boots now... :-) ;) > I "fought" a little bit with fdisk, boot0cfg and bsdlabel some > weeks ago... It was quite weird... Somehow those 16 sectors were > not there in the beginning of ad0s1; so I had to move the whole > ad0s1a, because I mentioned that too late... ;-) How did You managed to move it on bsd? > Do you remember the output of > % fdisk ad0 > and > %bsdlabel ad0s1 > ? I have output from bsdlabel -A but unfortunately not from fdisk, so I can't compare it. Although I may have copy of MBR made with dd somewhere. Good suggestion, THX. Will try to compare fdisk output. I will also try fill disk with 00, restore backup again, so will save fdisk output next time and maybe finally I will understand how fdisk works. Many thanks -- pawciobiel From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 20 22:20:19 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51BA16A41F for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:20:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.200.102]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 548FF43D45 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:20:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 64839 invoked by uid 60001); 20 Jan 2006 22:20:18 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=00IodSKZ7pk07skdjV3iEjz8rpx/ENWxn8ihPWazQ8AmB18Lasl5tjBq8uWdwN6BIVAL5ZyHYswJR12wUwFZyGVmbJ7/kD3FrkD7daJvB7FOFzo10PdZfx6wsa5yL3ZuqTvOMGsweF2lYjK69JMnsPo+KlaigNn1Zd+3F+VDQ5Q= ; Message-ID: <20060120222018.64837.qmail@web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [213.54.71.107] by web30309.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:20:18 PST Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:20:18 -0800 (PST) From: Arne Woerner To: Pawel , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <43D14A6A.4060305@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Re: Restoring backup on vergin disk X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:20:19 -0000 --- Pawel wrote: > Arne Woerner wrote: > > not there in the beginning of ad0s1; > > so I had to move the whole ad0s1a, > > because I mentioned that too late... ;-) > > How did You managed to move it on bsd? > I used geom_mirror and ad1s1a. :) In my box the disc looks like this: sector# purpose device 0-62 bootNstuff ad0 63-78 boot1+2? ad0s1 (0-15) 79-... root fs ad0s1a (0-...) -Arne __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 21 15:50:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C4716A41F for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:50:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B70643D48 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:50:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (inaxyd@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0LFo2q8050246 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:50:07 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id k0LFo2EN050245; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:50:02 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:50:02 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200601211550.k0LFo2EN050245@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20060120070110.80233.qmail@web50908.mail.yahoo.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-fs User-Agent: tin/1.8.0-20051224 ("Ronay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Sat, 21 Jan 2006 16:50:07 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: can snapshots become corrupted ? Is fsck'ing /dev/md0 sensible ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:50:10 -0000 Joe Schmoe wrote: > Let's say I have a running filesystem, and the system > crashes, and (for whatever reason) I mount and run the > filesystem in an unclean state. While in this > unclean, running state, I create a snapshot on it. > > Now let's say I unmount the filesystem and fsck it for > real. It gets marked clean. Is the snapshot that > resides on that filesystem still dirty ? Disclaimer: I haven't tried that, so this is just theory. Yes, the snapshot is probably still "dirty". But it shouldn't matter, because you can only mount it read-only anyway. > If so, is it expected that use of the clean FS with > the dirty snapshot enabled would cause system > instability (hard lock of system). It probably depends how "dirty" it is. If you had soft- updates enabled and the disk is reliable (i.e. not an IDE/ATA disk with write-cache enabled), then there are only unused blocks not marked as free. It is save to mount such a filesystem. But in all other cases, mounting a dirty filesystem read/write (forcibly) can indeed cause instability. It doesn't matter if snapshots are involved or not. > If so, is it sensible for me to mount the snapshot on > md0 and fsck /dev/md0 ? I don't think you can fsck a snapshot. Snapshots are read-only. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "The last good thing written in C was Franz Schubert's Symphony number 9." -- Erwin Dieterich From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 21 17:26:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FFC716A41F for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:26:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from non_secure@yahoo.com) Received: from web50914.mail.yahoo.com (web50914.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.39.93]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9FAFD43D45 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:26:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from non_secure@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 19853 invoked by uid 60001); 21 Jan 2006 17:26:44 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=slUqvEmN7kHPXwo+9VjHGb3E1B2fqKeXGpoD78IpY8+QQgo771E46Op8/dq9ICRChtSfKqFLQcSXWGgEZRq17kw1ulfOjm6fNV0yzn6dzorL7dtLZGVDPTIhQrJneGHnFneBx4+fNM2vk+pQG/J2J22xNKCTDmUE9lcDdo5jq1Y= ; Message-ID: <20060121172644.19851.qmail@web50914.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.94.196.84] by web50914.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:26:43 PST Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:26:43 -0800 (PST) From: Joe Schmoe To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: can snapshots become corrupted ? Is fsck'ing /dev/md0 sensible ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 17:26:45 -0000 Oliver, Thank you very much for your response. On Sat, 21 Jan 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: > Joe Schmoe wrote: > > Let's say I have a running filesystem, and the system > > crashes, and (for whatever reason) I mount and run the > > filesystem in an unclean state. While in this > > unclean, running state, I create a snapshot on it. > > > > Now let's say I unmount the filesystem and fsck it for > > real. It gets marked clean. Is the snapshot that > > resides on that filesystem still dirty ? > > Disclaimer: I haven't tried that, so this is just theory. > > Yes, the snapshot is probably still "dirty". But it > shouldn't matter, because you can only mount it read-only > anyway. Ok, yes, the snapshot can only be mounted read-only - this is true. However, the snapshot itself (whether mounted or not) is continually being changed as files are being changed or deleted on the filesystem in question. So if the snapshot is corrupt, and I start making changes/deletions on the (now clean) filesystem, then wouldn't there be problems ? > It probably depends how "dirty" it is. If you had soft- > updates enabled and the disk is reliable (i.e. not an > IDE/ATA disk with write-cache enabled), then there are > only unused blocks not marked as free. It is save to > mount such a filesystem. But in all other cases, mounting > a dirty filesystem read/write (forcibly) can indeed cause > instability. It doesn't matter if snapshots are involved > or not. Ok, understood. However, once I do a full and successful fsck on that filesystem, it is completely safe again, regardless of how long or how often I ran it while it was dirty, right ? Here are some further, chronological details of what I saw: - I had a perfectly clean filesystem - I made 2-3 snapshots on that filesystem - the system crashed - I _did not_ fsck the filesystem completely - I made 2-3 _more_ snapshots on that filesystem - suddenly, all attempts to rsync the files from this filesystem to a remote host caused an almost immediate hard lock of the system - I then did a full, successful fsck of the filesystem. It is now totally clean. - rsync of that filesystem to a remote system still causes almost immediate crashes - I mounted the filesystem read-only - the rsync _succeeds_ (note, when the filesystem is read-only, softupdates are disabled) - I mount it read-write again, and the rsync crashes the system again - I delete all snapshots on the filesystem, and now the rsync works perfectly, as expected, whether the filesystem is read-write or read-only. So the first question is the one I am asking, and requesting further clarification about above. It is the question of corrupt snapshots on clean filesystems. The second question I need to ask is, when I am rsyncing this filesystem to a remote host, why is it not a read-only operation ? My rsync process, because this filesystem was the _source_, and not the destination, should not have written anything to this filesystem. However, it succeeded when the fs was read-only (softupdates were off) and it failed when the filesystem was read-write (softupdates on). Is there some kind of manipulation of the source filesystem that rsync does that would be equal to a lot of writing to the source disk ? It is my understanding that soft-updates only deal with writes to the disk, so I am very confused about that behavior. Thank you very much for your help. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 21 20:58:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34CBD16A41F for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 20:58:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [83.120.8.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FC443D45 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 20:58:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (dapatm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0LKwJSl059338 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:58:24 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id k0LKwJ9Q059337; Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:58:19 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:58:19 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <200601212058.k0LKwJ9Q059337@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20060121172644.19851.qmail@web50914.mail.yahoo.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-fs User-Agent: tin/1.8.0-20051224 ("Ronay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-STABLE (i386)) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.1.2 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Sat, 21 Jan 2006 21:58:25 +0100 (CET) Cc: Subject: Re: can snapshots become corrupted ? Is fsck'ing /dev/md0 sensible ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 20:58:27 -0000 Joe Schmoe wrote: > On Sat, 21 Jan 2006, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > Yes, the snapshot is probably still "dirty". But it > > shouldn't matter, because you can only mount it read-only > > anyway. > > Ok, yes, the snapshot can only be mounted read-only - > this is true. However, the snapshot itself (whether > mounted or not) is continually being changed as files > are being changed or deleted on the filesystem in > question. So if the snapshot is corrupt, and I start > making changes/deletions on the (now clean) > filesystem, then wouldn't there be problems ? That question would have to be answered by a snapshots expert. But I guess you're right, there are probably problems. > Ok, understood. However, once I do a full and > successful fsck on that filesystem, it is completely > safe again, regardless of how long or how often I ran > it while it was dirty, right ? Right, provided the dirtyness was only soft-updates related and the disks were reliable. > [...] > The second question I need to ask is, when I am > rsyncing this filesystem to a remote host, why is it > not a read-only operation ? My rsync process, because > this filesystem was the _source_, and not the > destination, should not have written anything to this > filesystem. However, it succeeded when the fs was > read-only (softupdates were off) and it failed when > the filesystem was read-write (softupdates on). Is > there some kind of manipulation of the source > filesystem that rsync does that would be equal to a > lot of writing to the source disk ? When you read from a file, its atime (access time) is scheduled for an update (unless the FS is mounted with the "noatime" flag). That's a write operation. So when you rsync a lot of files, quite a lot of meta data updates can pile up. That happens only if the FS is mounted read-write, of course. > It is my understanding that soft-updates only deal > with writes to the disk That's right. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way. "Being really good at C++ is like being really good at using rocks to sharpen sticks." -- Thant Tessman