similar to: rebooting more often to stop fsck problems and total disk loss

Hi, After our big ext3 file server crashes, I notice the fsck spends some time replaying the journals (about 5-10 mins for all volumes on the server in question). I guess it must do this should you want to mount the volumes as ext2. My question--is it (theoretically) possible to tell fsck only to replay half-finished and to knock out incomplete transactions from the journals, leaving the kernel

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 subject about says it all. should this only be done once per device or periodically? thanks! - -- Douglas J Hunley (doug at hunley.homeip.net) - Linux User #174778 Admin: Linux StepByStep - http://www.linux-sxs.org and http://jobs.linux-sxs.org Illiterate? Write for help! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

From: Les Mikesell Sent: April 21, 2015 09:19 > > Why do you care about running them at the same time when it doesn't > take longer 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

hello everyone. i guess this has been asked before, but haven't found it in the faq. i have the following issue... it is not uncommon nowadays to have desktops with filesystems in the order of 500gb/1tb. now, my kubuntu (but other distros do the same) forces a fsck on ext3 every so often, no matter what. in the past it wasn't a big issue. but with sizes increasing so much, users are

Dear Ted, I upgraded e2fsprogs and util-linux to the latest versions, as per the instructions on the "ext3 for 2.4" page, to make the switching between ext2-only and ext3-enabled kernels seamless. Now that if the filesystems have not been unmounted cleanly, due to a power failure for example, "fsck -A -a" cannot continue after checking the root filesystem on reboot, issuing

Hi there, I'm running software raid 1 across two 60GB IDE drives and booting off the raid device. The raid device holds an ext3 filesystem. Each drive is configured as a master on its own bus. The system is redhat 7.2, stock kernel 2.4.9-31smp. The hardware platform is a Dell precision dual 2Ghz P4 system with 1G of memory. I have two of these systems, both configured identitically.

Hello, This may be a slightly rambling and inexpert question from point of view of the learned folks on this list - feel free to go and read something more interesting, but I am curious and a little alarmed about a recent event. I am running Linux from Scratch ("LFS"), under a locally compiled Kernel 2.4.20 (SMP). The root filsytem was created as ext2 and converted to ext3 with an

From: Kay Diederichs Sent: April 21, 2015 03:43 > On 04/21/2015 06:08 AM, Hugh E Cruickshank wrote: > > > > The second idea was to set each filesystem to a different random > > count value. This would run the risk of having two or more > > executions at the same time but it would probably not be very > > frequent. > > Using "tune2fs -c", set the

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 No-one out there who can give me any tips for this? (Then the space to do experiments will finally be used in other ways. And I hope this mail won't be consired to impolite...) On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:23:15 +0100 Milan Holz?pfel <lists at mjh.name> wrote: > Hello, > > I got an IDE-drive which decided to get broken. Part of

From: Warren Young Sent: April 21, 2015 14:13 > On Apr 21, 2015, at 9:50 AM, Hugh E Cruickshank wrote: > > > > From: Kay Diederichs Sent: April 21, 2015 03:43 > >> > >> 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. > > > > Thanks but

If I have the 6th column in fstab (the pass column) set to 0, does that mean disk checks will never be forced at boot regardless of anything like File System State, Mount Count, and Check Interval on the file system itself, or are there exceptions to this? I know `man fstab` says: If the sixth field is not present or zero, a value of zero is returned and fsck will assume that the filesystem does

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

Hi, We've got some units in client's vehicles which are running Fedora core 1. We've can log into them over ssh remotely there is no console attached to them. I suspect one of them has some filesystem corruption, and I'd like to both force a fsck at next reboot (which I think I can do with shutdown -F) but I'd also like to make this fsck not require any human intervention.

Hi All, Trying to run fsck on a local linux raid partition gave the following. [root at ... /]# fsck.ext4 /dev/md0 e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) /dev/md0 has unsupported feature(s): 64bit e2fsck: Get a newer version of e2fsck! Odd as the server is 64bit running latest kernel and using latest "e2fsprogs.x86_64". Any ideas awould be much appreciated. Cheers Steve k

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

Hi - We have an ext3 file system which is 3.5TB in size (on top of lvm). Free are 172049011 out of 854473728 4096K blocks, and 396540654 out of 427245568 inodes. This is using Scientific Linux 4.4 (a RHEL clone). The filesystem consists of multiple backups created with rsync using --link-dest, which hard links files which haven't been modified to the previous copy. There are several hundred

i posted on rhel list about proper creating of 6tb ext3 filesystem and tuning here.......http://www.redhat.com/archives/nahant-list/2006-November/msg00239.html i am reading lots of ext3 links like...... http://www.redhat.com/support/wpapers/redhat/ext3/ http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2005-September/052533.html http://batleth.sapienti-sat.org/projects/FAQs/ext3-faq.html ............but

System info: ------------ [root@angel root]# cat /etc/issue Red Hat Linux release 7.2 (Enigma) Kernel \r on an \m [root@angel root]# uname -a Linux angel 2.4.9-34 #1 Sat Jun 1 06:25:16 EDT 2002 i686 unknown This problem occured after upgrade to kernel 2.4.18-17.7, backed out to previous version now (2.4.9-34). All other system RPMs are up to date according to RHN, and nothing, aside from

Greetings! Need your help fellow penguins! Strange behavior with fsck.ext3: how to remove a long orphaned inode list? After copying data over from one old RAID to another new RAID with rsync, the dump command would not complete because of filesystem errors on the new RAID. So I ran fsck.ext3 with the -y option and it would just run in an infinite loop restarting itself and then trying to correct