similar to: Ext3 filesystem access after downgrade from v4.2 to v3.6 [SOLVED]

I need to downgrade a system from Centos x4.2 to v3.6 (x86) due to performance problems with Arkeia Network Backup and AIT-4 tape drives. The backup database is stored on a v4.2 created ext3 partition. When accessing this partition after the downgrade, Centos complains on boot that fsck.ext3: Filesystem has unsupported feature(s) (/dev/sda5) *fsck: Get a newer version of e2fsck! [fail] If I

Does Fsync of a file on a ext3 fs mounted with "ordered" option(the default) result in flush the dirty data buffers in the fs that correspond to previous transactions. In other words, if I keep writing to file1 (lots of data), log something to file2, keep fsyncing file2 after every write - does this mean file1 data would be committed by fsyncs on file2. Please copy me on your replies

On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 20:16:23 -0500 Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > on Sun Dec 17 12:15:28 2023 Rowland Penny via samba > <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 11:50:18 -0500 > > Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > > > Spindles7, Thanks. my cloning the

Hello guys, I have some difficulties to understand what really are the numbers behing "df" and tune2fs. You'll find the output of tune2fs and df below, on which my maths are based. Here are my maths: A tune2fs on an ext3 FS tell me the FS size is 3284992 block large. It also tell me that the size of one block is 4096 (bytes if I'm not wrong?). So my maths tell me that the disk

Hi, I'm about to roll out a whole bunch of Redhat Enterprise 4 workstations and have run into problems cloning from the original. Normally I would use ghost (v7.5) because it does a nice job when cloning to a different sized disk.Unfortunately it comes up with read error 29004. Looking around it seems that Symantec don't support Fedora Core 3 (with Ghost v.8 - don't know if v.9 works

Thanks for you help. I also tried adding some other informations as you suggest: I can also take into account: - "Reserved block count: XXXXXXX" from tune2fs that gives me the number of blocks reserved for root - Reserved GDT blocks: XXX But I didn't thought about the FS journal. How can I gather information about it? (it's size and any other information?) 2013/9/16

On 9/16/13 5:16 AM, Nicolas Michel wrote: > Hello guys, > > I have some difficulties to understand what really are the numbers > behing "df" and tune2fs. You'll find the output of tune2fs and df > below, on which my maths are based. > > Here are my maths: > > A tune2fs on an ext3 FS tell me the FS size is 3284992 block large. It > also tell me that

Hi, I'm using ext3 filesystems in embedded devices (storage is on 512Mb or 1Gb CF cards). A typical development cycle would see the filesystem created on the desktop PC running linux 2.4 (eg. RedHat 9). The CF card would be installed in the hardware and linux 2.4 (eg. Montavista Pro 3.1, on PPC) would boot from the CF. Recently I tried a linux 2.6 desktop (CentOS) for the same task and

Hi, I have two 3TB (hardware RAID-5) ext3 filesystems and recently added 1TB to each. I resized each filesystem and e2fsck -f reports that both are fine. However, when I look at the ext3 parameters with tune2fs -l one seems to have some parameters that the other one doesn't. In particular, one has: "Reserved GDT blocks", "Filesystem created", "Default directory

Hello, How to upgrade existing ext3 partition to new features? Moved from RHEL3 to RHEL4. I had to install from c0d0p6 so partition could not be reformated during install. Thanks, Mindaugas # dumpe2fs /dev/cciss/c0d0p1 | fgrep features dumpe2fs 1.35 (28-Feb-2004) Filesystem features: has_journal ext_attr resize_inode dir_index filetype needs_recovery sparse_super # dumpe2fs

On 9/16/13 9:44 AM, Nicolas Michel wrote: > Thanks for you help. I also tried adding some other informations as you suggest: > I can also take into account: > - "Reserved block count: XXXXXXX" from tune2fs that gives me the > number of blocks reserved for root > - Reserved GDT blocks: XXX > > But I didn't thought about the FS journal. How can I gather

Hi, I have a program that writes lots of files to a directory tree (around 15 Million fo files), and a node can have up to 400000 files (and I don't have any way to split this ammount in smaller ones). As the number of files grows, my application gets slower and slower (the app is works something like a cache for another app and I can't redesign the way it distributes files into disk due

On Dec 18 03:22:32 2023 Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 20:16:23 -0500 > Mark Foley via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > on Sun Dec 17 12:15:28 2023 Rowland Penny via samba > > <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 17 Dec 2023 11:50:18 -0500 > > > Mark

Hey, I have two identical machines setup with a RAID 5 array. One of them is used for failovers and data from the master is synced everyday using rsync to the failover machine. The data on this disks are usually intranet KB's, DB's etc.. The RAID 5 arrays are formatted using the default options i,e mkfs.ext3 /dev/Xda. The RAID controller is 3ware escalade and each disk member in the RAID

OK. Thanks for the journal information. I thought tune2fs -l and dumpe2fs were the same. In reality it's almost the same but not entirely ^^ I hear you about all the internal mecanisms that make the FS working or give it some features, and I do understand that it takes some place on the disk. However what I don't understand is why the number given in the "available column" is

Yes indeed it is probably what's going on. what filesystem are you using and what are the mount options? ? Original Message ? From: lists at bago.org Sent: November 22, 2017 4:26 PM To: gluster-users at gluster.org Subject: [Gluster-users] error "Not able to add to index" in brick logs in my /var/log/gluster/bricks/mybrick-path.log I get thousands of those errors: ------

(I'm not subscribed to the list: please keep me in CC) I'm copying files between two samba server using robocopy from a third Windows PC and i'm experiencing disk usage that is much higher on the destination PC. The origin samba server is Debian Lenny with samba 3.2.5. The destination samba server is Debian Wheezy with samba 3.6.9 The PC running robocopy is Windows Server 2003 with

in my /var/log/gluster/bricks/mybrick-path.log I get thousands of those errors: ------ [2017-11-22 21:06:23.768354] E [MSGID: 138003] [index.c:624:index_link_to_base] 0-sharedvol-index: /home/sharedvol/.glusterfs/indices/xattrop/0b852dad-b332-4bfe-a38b-976729ee46a2: Not able to add to index [Troppi collegamenti] The message "E [MSGID: 138003] [index.c:624:index_link_to_base]

Hello, I have 2 boxes with 1.5TB storage with ext3 fs, and the kernel is 2.6.11.8. I'm using E2fsprogs 1.37 for FS creation. And, Filesystem revision #: 1 (dynamic) There are 2 scenarios: 1. All SATA drives, RAID5 2. All PATA drives, RAID5 and wrapped in log volumes. I'm having lots of issues with fsck. I did search, but somehow not getting the right information. needs_recovery

On 8/17/14, 12:28 PM, Roland Olbricht wrote: > Hello everybody, > > first of all thank you the development of Ext2/3/4. It works like a > charm and makes it possible to base applications on it. > However, "df" says: > > Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on > ... > /dev/sdc 468346644 409888536 35015532 93% /opt/ssd >