From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 21 22:46:48 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F2A16A421 for ; Mon, 21 May 2007 22:46:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EADD13C447 for ; Mon, 21 May 2007 22:46:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74451A3C19; Mon, 21 May 2007 15:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7DB125135C; Mon, 21 May 2007 18:46:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 18:46:47 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: "Rick C. Petty" Message-ID: <20070521224647.GA83380@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <475187.33232.qm@web63006.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <4651F897.9010201@infidyne.com> <20070521195634.GA80608@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070521203556.GA84210@keira.kiwi-computer.com> <20070521203938.GA81333@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070521221232.GA86033@keira.kiwi-computer.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070521221232.GA86033@keira.kiwi-computer.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: VERY frustrated with FreeBSD/UFS stability - please help or comment... 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: Mon, 21 May 2007 22:46:48 -0000 On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 05:12:32PM -0500, Rick C. Petty wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 04:39:39PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:35:56PM -0500, Rick C. Petty wrote: > > > > > > Hmm, this recently happened to me in 6.2-STABLE. I was unable to replicate > > > it so filing a PR was pointless. What I saw happen was that /usr filled up > > > completely (I caught it before it hit 100% full, but watched helplessly as > > > it switched from time to space optimization). I even did a "du -hd0 /usr" > > > and saw it only using about 20% of the file system. lsof and fstat weren't > > > terribly helpful. After shutting down to single-user mode, I saw it full > > > even though I deleted a lot of superfluous files, and du/df differences > > > were still present. I restarted and fsck cleaned up the 80% "used" space, > > > stating the superblock free maps were incorrect, which explains the > > > discrepency. Why it happened, I'm still baffled. > > > > OK, it may be that the bug is still around in some form, or it could > > be a different issue. One thing to check is whether you have a > > snapshot active, because this will cause a very similar behaviour. > > I don't use snapshots, except for bgfsck, which wasn't necessary because > everything preened clean. > > Like I said, it would be difficult to chase down. I should probably just > enable kernel DDB in case it happens again. Yeah, if you can force a dump when something like this happens then it may help to track it down. Sometimes it is hard to reconstruct the sequence of events leading to such a point though. Kris