From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 6 22:19:14 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4E916A40E for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 22:19:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from parrot.aev.net (parrot.aev.net [212.31.247.179]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2033C13C49D for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 22:19:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from soth.ventu (adsl-ull-58-223.51-151.net24.it [151.51.223.58]) (authenticated bits=128) by parrot.aev.net (8.14.0/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l26LqpmB035867 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 22:52:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Received: from [10.1.2.18] (alamar.ventu [10.1.2.18]) by soth.ventu (8.14.0/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l26LikpR052911; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 22:44:46 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ml.diespammer@netfence.it) Message-ID: <45EDE0C5.1010305@netfence.it> Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 22:44:37 +0100 From: Andrea Venturoli User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070306) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: kostikbel@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.61 on 212.31.247.179 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: LOR #193 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 22:19:14 -0000 Hello. I'm experiencing the above mentioned LOR on a 6.2p1/amd64 box (running gmirror and SMP if that matters). With reference to your question on http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2006-November/031048.html: > What application you run that triggers the LOR ? Bacula, I guess. I'm taking filesystem snapshots, running the backup job and deleting the snapshots. In fact I've always seen some problems with some files in the snapshots not being accessible to bacula-fd. In a previous (quite old) thread it was in fact suggested I might be seeing some LOR, but only recently I activated all the debugging stuff. What's the risk of running the suggested patch on a (quite critical) production server? BTW: Sometimes, upon reboot, delayed fscks start and say that the filesystem cannot be fixed with -p and I should run a full fsck. If I reboot in single user mode and run a full fsck, it will find no errors. Also, I have a couple of other boxes on which I run bacula this way and I never experienced this problem: they are respectively i386/gmirror/UP and amd64/hardware RAID/SMP; so, might the combination of amd64/gmirror or gmirror/SMP be in the way? bye & Thanks av.