similar to: EXT3-fs unexpected failure msg ?

Hi - We have had 3 rather major occurances of ext3 filesystem corruption lately, i.e. so bad we couldn't event mount, and fsck didn't help. I am looking for pointers, that could help us investigate the root cause. In general... We are running RedHat WS 3 Update 6, 2.4.21-40.2.ELsmp or 2.4.21-37.ELsmp We have a small SAN system that looks like this

An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/ext3-users/attachments/20060828/ce9c7bc0/attachment.htm>

Hi folks -- My machine is a RHEL 3 with 2.4 kernel installed - with some large ext3 filesystems on drives connected internally ( >200G) Now, When this system crashed (for eg:- a CPU panic /hardware error ) - e2fsck on this filesystem seems to be taking a long time to return thereby adding to the overall downtime of this system. could there be any workarounds for my issue? say for

Are we likely to see patches to allow 16TB ext3 in the mainstream kernel any time soon? I am working with a storage box that has 16x750GB drives RAID5-ed together to create a potential 10.5TB of potential storage. But because ext3 is limited to 8TB I am forced to split into 2 smaller ext3 filesystems which is really cumbersome for my app. Any ideas anybody?

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

Hi, There wasn't much information regarding fragment support of ext2/3 since 2003 [1], Andreas stating that there were problems with the xattr implementation. Has this changed in the meanwhile? My second question is regarding the bytes-per-inode ratio: What benefits would I gain from having fewer inodes? I reckon it's only diskspace (if so, how much?). best regards, Michael Renner [1]

Hi folks, For unknown cause I encounter following mounting problem; # /mnt/hda8 mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hda8, missing codepage or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so # dmesg | tail via82cxxx: timeout while reading AC97 codec (0x9A0000) via82cxxx: timeout while reading AC97 codec (0x9A0000)

I have an ext3 filesystem mounted r/w on 1 host and r/o on multiple hosts. Dangerous but cost effective. I recently implemented some protection through a fc switch that restricts some hosts to r/o access to the data luns. So if someone types mount -o rw or something, all is not lost. The issue occurs when it's mounted r/w on 1 host and another host attempts to mount it r/o. The mount

I've got a 3.3TB ext3 on a FC3 64-bit system, running kernel 2.6.10-1.766FC3smp. I create the partition with parted 1.6.21, and I make the fs via: mkfs.ext3 -m1 -b 4096 -T largefile4 /dev/sda1 Works fine. bonnie++ running on it multiple times for days on end, no problems. However, I do the exact same setup on a RHEL4-AS i686 system, 32-bit, and the fs is totally hosed, get all kinds of

Hello, I looked through the archives a bit and could not find anything relevant, if you know otherwise please point me in the right direction. I have a ~3T ext3 filesystem on linux software raid that had been behaving corectly for sometime. Not to long ago it gave the following error after trying to mount it: mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md0, or too many

I am trying to get a 9550SX to support a 1.5TB raid partition. I am unsure whether this is a driver problem, or an ext3 problem (as am getting some other wierdness detecting LUNs), but... fdisk recognizes the disk OK. I make a single extended partition with a single 1.5TB logical partition inside it. I then run mke2fs -j /dev/sdb It gets to writing inode tables, and wants to write 11176 block

Hi, I just noticed that my file server running 2.4.18-pre3 + IDE patches & NTFS patches has this error message in the logs: EXT3-fs error (device md(9,4)): ext3_free_blocks: Freeing blocks not in datazone - block = 33554432, count = 1 This is the only ext3 error I have seen and the uptime is currently over 74 days. The error actually appeared two weeks ago. The timing coincides well with

Let me preface this by saying "Yes, I know *nix filesystems don't need to worry about fragmentation". That said, is there a way to check the overall level of fragmentation of a live ext3 filesystem? I know about filefrag, but that's for specific files. And I think e2fsck tells you, but only if you take the filesystem offline for the scan. Is there anything that will give

Someone recently posted the following statement midway down the page at http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-305871-postdays-0-postorder-asc-highlight-ext3+ordered+data-start-25.html >You don't need to defragment ext2/ext3 because as you use the >filesystem file blocks and inodes are moved around and reallocated >to keep the data nearly contiguous. It's not perfect, but it

Hi All, Can anyone help me in resolving this problem. I use Redhat 9 Enterprise edition. I have a session in which I logged in as a root. When I issue the command "su" from any other user it is throwing error "su : Incorrect password", If I try to change the password from the root session, it is throwing error "passwd : module unknown". [root at TESTING

Hi, After panic boot, I have executed fsck for the mount point and we couldn't find a single file. We have lot of directories under lost+found like this #3194985. Can anyone tell me how to recover the data from this folder? This is urgent. Thanks in advance for your help. Regards Kapil Sampath "Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they

I just discovered two directories with the same number of files and the same number of hard links but different size: # stat /home/david/linuxburg/fax.old/docq_ps.nnnn \ /hdsync/home/david/linuxburg/fax.old/docq_ps.nnnn File: `/home/david/linuxburg/fax.old/docq_ps.nnnn' Size: 8192 Blocks: 16 IO Block: 4096 directory Device: 801h/2049d Inode: 52060

I created a filesystem as follows: mke2fs -j -O dir_index -O sparse_super -T largefile /dev/drbd/6 Here's the the output from df Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% /dev/drbd/6 475G 33M 452G 1% It seems that ext3 has taken 23 GB, which is about 5% of the total disk size, for itself. Is that right? If that is, indeed, the case, why does df just list 33M as being

Hi, I connected my harddisk which had ext3 filesystem and some files archived in it as slave device and issued "mkfs /dev/hdb2" accidentally. Immediately I issued Ctrl C and stopped the process. But before that it had deleted some 100 Blocks. After that I am unable to boot that hard disk as primary device. The system is asking me "please insert a valid boot device and press

Hi, I am using kernel 2.6.15.4. On my system, I first created a partition with EXT3 and put some data on it. Later, I deleted the partition, and re-created another partition with the same starting block number and a higher ending block number. I intended to format it with another filesystem, but surprisingly (or maybe just to me), the superblock of the partition had not changed. I could still