From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 28 15:25:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E8B116A4CE; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:25:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (u46n208.hfx.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.208]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D0043D1F; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:25:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CEE5C3A534; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:25:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDD8A3A532; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:25:34 -0300 (ADT) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 12:25:34 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Robert Watson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040728121601.C792@ganymede.hub.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZERO LENGTH DIRECTORY & fsck X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:25:36 -0000 On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Jul 2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> Is there anything that can be done to 'fix' this? Under 4.x, using >> unionfs (and don't respond if your only answer is "its broken"), if it >> crashes, fsck finds a whack of the above ... > > It's broken. :-) But in all honesty, this has been discussed extensively, > and it's carefully documented in the man page. So if you run into bugs, > it should not be a surprise. It doesn't surprise me, never has ... I've been most appreciatative of the work/time that ppl like David Schultz and Tor Egge (among others) have put in to help debug, and fix issues I've been able to provide core files for ... over the past year, unionfs (at least for me) has gone from something that I can watch a server lock up daily running out of vnodes, to something that goes for >3 months before a crash/reboot ... its not perfect, but its 100x better then it was last year ... >> Now, I think I understand the *why* for the error ... union creates a >> 'mirror' of the file system, especially where a du/find is concerned, >> and teh ZLDs are 'end nodes' that have no files under them ... but is >> there a better way that fsck can handle those? Its almost as if it >> doesn't know what to do with them, so has to remove them all ... > > Are you using union mounting of UFS or unionfs? Theory tells us that > unionfs is a stacked file system layer, and shouldn't directly manipulate > the on-disk layout of UFS, instead, issuing vnode operations that allow > UFS to maintain its consistency guarantees. Theory tells us that union > mounting UFS relies on UFS doing the magic, which means it has more > opportunity to currupt on disk storage. unionfs ... basically, I run: /sbin/mount_union -b