search for: fscks

...to run them all in parallel? Except I think the root > filesystem normally runs first. So you might want to stagger it vs. > everything else. I am trying to avoid running them at the same time in an effort to avoid 70 minute boot times (which is what happened on the weekend). I accept that fscks are required on a periodic basis and I am willing to reboot more often to achieve these but I would like to minimize downtime (during the reboot) where possible. > And unless you reboot frequently you are probably hitting the time > setting, not the mount count. This is in fact what transpi...

...t; > You may be missing a key fact of how prime numbers work. You are right and I stand corrected. I have done some "what if" testing. Assuming 8 filesystems and weekly reboots over a ten year period... The random numbers would result in as many as 40 weeks per year where 2, 3 or 4 fscks would be run in the same week depending on the random numbers selected. Using the prime numbers 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29 and 31 the is a maximum of 7 incidents per year of 2 fscks per week and none for 3 or more. Clearly the prime numbers are better. Thank, Hugh -- Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward...

...9-31smp. The hardware platform is a Dell precision dual 2Ghz P4 system with 1G of memory. I have two of these systems, both configured identitically. I've had filesystem corruption problems on both machines. In the process of trying to troubleshoot the problem, I've used tune2fs to force fscks on every 1 mount, but these never happen on reboot. If I do tune2fs -l /dev/md0 I can clearly see that the system is past its maximal mount count, and that it has a "needs check" flag, but it does not fsck on boot or even ask to be optionally fsck'd on boot like it does when the files...

Im brand new to rsync and i been doing alot of reading about it and it looks like the tool I have long been wanting. Bascially i got 1 server, 2 hard drives. partions are / /boot /home /usr /var /backup (2nd drive) Bascially what i am looking at doing is mirroring the first drive to the 2nd drive, and once that intial one is moved over, have a cron run nightly (or when specified) that will

...ent. > > Using "tune2fs -c", set the max-mount-counts to a different > prime number > for each filesystem. So e.g. instead of having 20 for all of them, set > the first filesystem to 17, the second to 19, the third to 23, and the > fourth to 29. This way, three or more fscks on the same boot are quite > unlikely. Thanks but that is not much different then my second idea and does not fully avoid the problem. Regards, Hugh -- Hugh E Cruickshank, Forward Software, www.forward-software.com

...hugh at forsoft.com> wrote: > > I have done some "what if" testing. Using which tool? My simulator, or something you cooked up yourself? If the latter, would you care to share? I?ve updated mine to break out the stats for 3+ volumes instead of just reporting all multi-volume fscks together: https://gist.github.com/wyoung/7c94967bb635de48d058 Then I rewrote that in C++, since these 8-volume simulations were literally going to take days with the Perl version: https://gist.github.com/wyoung/966383b4efbb63aafc71 (The Perl version is about 1/5 the speed of the C++ one...

...ello, I've just compiled 2.4.6 patched for ext3 filesystem and with out incident the conversion went fine. System Specs. Redhat 6.1 (highly hacked on since install on Sep 1999) kernel 2.4.6 gcc 2.95.2 egcs 2.91.66 XFree 4.1.0 I followed the docs, but I have once issue, on hardboot it still fscks the drives. Is this a cause of the rc scripts needing tweaking or a fstab setting. thanks for the advice and work. Terry Achilles' Biological Findings: (1) If a child looks like his father, that's heredity. If he looks like a neighbor, that's environment....

...radition of trial and error, I tried with installing libogg-devel and voil?! No more segfaulting flac! May I suggest that configure treats the lack of ogg a bit more serious than just writing a warning? ;> Oh, since I'm already reporting, another thing I had a problem with is that the build fscks up if you have support for xmms and you aren't building the binaries as root. I prefer to not build all the software as root and thus usually use the PREFIX-argument. When I ran make install, it bugged out because it couldn't write to /usr/lib/xmms/Input/ (Nat?rlich!). Now, thankfully I hav...

Hey! I have some RHEL6 hypervisors and the VMs are in raw qemu image files in a local raid array linux raid + lvm + ext3. When a kernel update is installed a reboot is necessary, usually it has been more than 180 days since the last reboot and the file system is fsck'd and this takes 2-3 hours. I am curious to know if there is any documentation that addresses the pro's and con's of

From: Gordon Messmer Sent: April 21, 2015 10:30 > > On 04/21/2015 09:40 AM, Hugh E Cruickshank wrote: > > I accept that fscks are required on a periodic basis and I > am willing > > to reboot more often to achieve these but I would like to minimize > > downtime (during the reboot) where possible. > > Why do you accept that? Every article I have read on the subject has recommended this a good practi...

Hello. Is there a simple way, at a shell script level, of finding out whether an ext3 fs has a sane journal, other than mounting it or running a full fsck ? I may quite well be missing a few things here, but what I think I'd like is some option extra to e2fsck that says "if this is a journalled filesystem, and it was shut down uncleanly, just replay the journal and check for immediately

CentOS 6 Hi All: Over the weekend I had to reboot one of my systems and got hit with fsck runs on all of the filesystems. I would not mind so much except doing them all at once took over an hour. I would like to be able to stagger these, ideally only execute one fsck per reboot. I have been able to think of two possible solutions but neither is terrific. My first idea was to manually run fsck

...SI (i.e., the mpt driver). Five of the fsck finished their tasks successfully and reported no problems. The remaining three got "stuck". There was no activity either on the physical RAID itself or listed in top. They were just listed as "D," uninterruptible sleep. Two of the fscks were at the end, giving the final summary information--no problems---for their respective filesystems and were stuck at that point. The last one was stuck in the first pass. Attempts to kill them failed; even kill -9 and attempting to shutdown were ignored. I rebooted manually and ran the thre...

...SI (i.e., the mpt driver). Five of the fsck finished their tasks successfully and reported no problems. The remaining three got "stuck". There was no activity either on the physical RAID itself or listed in top. They were just listed as "D," uninterruptible sleep. Two of the fscks were at the end, giving the final summary information--no problems---for their respective filesystems and were stuck at that point. The last one was stuck in the first pass. Attempts to kill them failed; even kill -9 and attempting to shutdown were ignored. I rebooted manually and ran the thre...

...TIA > > Regards, Hugh > Using "tune2fs -c", set the max-mount-counts to a different prime number for each filesystem. So e.g. instead of having 20 for all of them, set the first filesystem to 17, the second to 19, the third to 23, and the fourth to 29. This way, three or more fscks on the same boot are quite unlikely. HTH, Kay

...9; (normally just the root filesystem) should complete first, then everything with a 2 will run at once. If the other mounts are each on different drive/spindles they won't conflict with each other and will complete in the same time as running just the largest one of them. If you are running fscks of partitions on the same drive in parallel it will obviously go slower. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com

On 04/21/2015 09:40 AM, Hugh E Cruickshank wrote: > I accept that fscks are required on a periodic basis and I am willing > to reboot more often to achieve these but I would like to minimize > downtime (during the reboot) where possible. Why do you accept that? The default behavior for filesystems set up by Red Hat tools (anaconda) is not to fsck. Not by moun...

...;> the first filesystem to 17, the second to 19, the third to 23, and the >> fourth to 29. > > Thanks but that is not much different then my second idea and does not > fully avoid the problem. You may be missing a key fact of how prime numbers work. You can only get two or more fscks on a single reboot when the mount count is a multiple of two or more of the max-mount-count values. When those numbers are all prime, the frequency of such occurrences is much lower than when you use purely random values. With the four values that Kay provided, I calculate a 1.2% chance on averag...

asterisk-dev-bounces@lists.digium.com wrote: > I have a DSP based system that is working on a four port FXS system > using a 200MHz arm processor. Well.. since we are talking about this topic I owe you guys notes of my experience with SC1100 CPU used by various boards (www.soekris.com , www.pcengines.ch etc.). We made a Linux distro and compacted it into 32MB flash. Installed asterisk and

Hi, I run several hundred servers that are used heavily (webhosting, etc.) all day long. Quite often we'll have a server that either needs a really long fsck (10 hours - 200 gig drive) or an fsck that evntually results in everything going to lost+found (pretty much a total loss). Would rebooting these servers monthly (or some other frequency) stop this? Is it correct to visualize this as