Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 28 Jul 1998 10:28:07 -0500
From:      Karl Denninger  <karl@mcs.net>
To:        Tor.Egge@fast.no
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Serious Dump problems
Message-ID:  <19980728102807.42807@mcs.net>
In-Reply-To: <199807281519.RAA12042@pat.idi.ntnu.no>; from Tor.Egge@fast.no on Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 05:19:47PM %2B0200
References:  <19980728073523.02311@mcs.net> <199807281519.RAA12042@pat.idi.ntnu.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 28, 1998 at 05:19:47PM +0200, Tor.Egge@fast.no wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> > 
> > I have an interesting one here...
> > 
> > I have a dump tape which is intact, yet restore complains about "hole in
> > map" and segv's when attempting to start up in interactive mode.
> 
> Philip Inglesant <philip@dircon.net> gave a good description of this
> problem on the -stable list.
> 
> You probably had more than 4 million inodes on the file system.  Thus
> the bitmaps uses more than 512 KB(i.e. more than 512 tape blocks).

I have more than 4M Inodes on the filesystem, but not more than 4M inodes IN
USE.
Filesystem  1K-blocks     Used    Avail Capacity iused   ifree  %iused Mounted 
/dev/sd0s1f  31164736 11790546 16881012    41%  417900 7375250     5% /export

That's the disk that is blowing chunks on restore....

> Running dump/restore using a 51 GB partition (with 13 million inodes
> gave the same problem for me.
> 
> > It appears that dump and restore are VERY old, and nobody is maintaining
> > them.  Interestingly enough, a new dump of the same filesystem produces
> > the same error, so I suspect a problem with dump where it is writing out a
> > bad directory map.
> 
> It is not sufficient to only change dump.  The calculation of maxino
> in restore depends upon the current behavior of dump, using a 
> value larger than 512 in the c_count field when the number of inodes
> is larger than 4 million.
> 
> Only a small change to restore is needed.
> 
> > Any ideas on this one?  Is there a more recent set of sources available
> > somewhere that might not display this problem?
> 
> I suggest using a patch similar to this (barely tested) one in order
> to avoid the buffer overrun in restore.

I'll try this one.

Assuming it works, is there some reason it hasn't been committed?

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin
http://www.mcs.net/          | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV
			     | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%!
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS
Fax:   [+1 312 803-4929]     | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980728102807.42807>