From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 22 9:56:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.du.gtn.com (mail.du.gtn.com [194.77.9.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCF4714CEC for ; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 09:56:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ticso@cicely8.cicely.de) Received: from mail.cicely.de (cicely.de [194.231.9.142]) by mail.du.gtn.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA17945; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 18:48:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from cicely8.cicely.de (cicely8.cicely.de [10.1.2.10]) by mail.cicely.de (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id SAA16845; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 18:55:27 +0100 (CET) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by cicely8.cicely.de (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA09286; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 18:54:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ticso) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 18:54:57 +0100 From: Bernd Walter To: Stephen McKay Cc: Christopher Masto , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Fsck follies Message-ID: <19991122185456.A9256@cicely8.cicely.de> References: <199911211236.WAA27489@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> <19991121130020.A2369@netmonger.net> <199911220457.OAA47173@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <199911220457.OAA47173@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 02:57:39PM +1000, Stephen McKay wrote: > On Sunday, 21st November 1999, Christopher Masto wrote: > > >On Sun, Nov 21, 1999 at 10:36:32PM +1000, Stephen McKay wrote: > >> When the system came back up, fsck -p didn't like the vinum volume. > >> No sweat, I ran it manually. There were many > >> > >> INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I= (4 should be 0) > >> > >> messages. I assumed this was an artifact of soft updates. The fsck > >> completed successfully. > >> > >> Being paranoid, I reran fsck. This time it reported a number of > >> unreferenced inodes (199 to be exact), and linked them in to lost+found. > >> > >> It is this last item that bothers me. When the first fsck completed, > >> the filesystem should have been structurally correct. But it wasn't. > >> A third fsck confirmed that 2 runs of fsck were enough. > > > >Presumably you are using vinum for mirroring? I have had to stop > >doing so after trashing several filesystems. There are some serious > >bugs that allow the plexes to get out of sync; as reads from a mirror > >set are round-robin, this can be very bad. It should be the same reason as discussed on freebsd-fs about R5 plexes. It never happened for me. What did you done to crash the fs? > No, I was just striping them (4 x 660 MB disks, 96 KB interleave). Vinum > had nothing to do with the problem. I was just reporting all the facts, > just in case. > > I think there is a fault in fsck. Possibly it is because softupdates > changed the rules. Having run md5 over the good copy and the broken > (power failure interrupted) copy as well as everything in lost+found, > I can say that no corrupted files survived, and everything in lost+found > was a good copy of some file or other. So softupdates appears to be > doing the right thing. But fsck didn't fix everything broken by the > power interruption. > Sometimes fsck tells you that it needs a rerun. See /usr/share/doc/smm/03.fsck/paper.ascii.gz for details about fsck. Are you shure that this was not the case? -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message