similar to: Corrupted journal

My UPS failed and my server took an 'unscheduled outage' a few weeks ago. The only casualty appears to be a volume I used for backup. I usually maintain data on multiple hard disks, but in this case I errantly had some data (of marginal value) on this file system. At this point, the data is not worth enough for me to send the drive out for data recovery, but it's worth enough to

I have been playing with external journals some more and thought I should share some experiences. I am running 2.4.16 with the ext3 patches from Andrew Morton and e2fsprogs 1.25 I have an ext3fs filesystem on an 8 drive RAID5 array and place the journal on a partition of the mirrored pair that I boot off (all drives SCSI). I have tried pulling the power cable and seeing what happens. I finally

On 2013-06-26, at 9:38 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 6/25/13 3:13 AM, Folkert van Heusden wrote: >> >> I have a system with an ext4 filesystem with its journal on an other >> device (an SSD). >> Now this SSD dropped of the sata bus so the filesystem went r/o. >> I would like to remove the journal but it says it can't because >> needs_check is set. >

On 6/27/13 3:57 AM, Folkert van Heusden wrote: > Eric, Andreas, > >>>> I have a system with an ext4 filesystem with its journal on an other >>>> device (an SSD). >>>> Now this SSD dropped of the sata bus so the filesystem went r/o. >>>> I would like to remove the journal but it says it can't because >>>> needs_check is set.

Eric, Andreas, >>> I have a system with an ext4 filesystem with its journal on an other >>> device (an SSD). >>> Now this SSD dropped of the sata bus so the filesystem went r/o. >>> I would like to remove the journal but it says it can't because >>> needs_check is set. >> >> What does it actually say? there is no needs_check flag

>>>>> I have a system with an ext4 filesystem with its journal on an other >>>>> device (an SSD). >>>>> Now this SSD dropped of the sata bus so the filesystem went r/o. >>>>> I would like to remove the journal but it says it can't because >>>>> needs_check is set. >>>> >>>> What does it actually

Peter Kjellstr?m wrote: > On Monday 23 January 2006 16:46, Plant, Dean wrote: >> 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

These came up on dmesg this morning: attempt to access beyond end of device 09:00: rw=0, want=1635237736, limit=976791680 attempt to access beyond end of device 09:00: rw=0, want=1635237736, limit=976791680 EXT3-fs error (device md(9,0)): ext3_free_blocks: Freeing blocks not in datazone - block = 4293394431, count = 1 attempt to access beyond end of device 09:00: rw=0, want=1930439616,

Hi, hoping that someone on this list can help me here is the Problem. After a crash it seems the journal could not be recovered. This is what mount gives: root@wuehlkiste:# mount -t ext3 /dev/hdb2 /mnt mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/hdb2, or too many mounted file systems and this is the corresponding logfile-entry: Nov 27 11:16:13 wuehlkiste kernel: attempt to

Hi Ted and all, I have a couple of questions near the end of this message, but first I have to describe my problem in some detail. The power failure on Thursday did something evil to my ext3 file system (box running RH9+patches, ext3, /dev/md0, raid5 driver, 400GB f/s using 3x200GB IDE drives and one hot-spare). The f/s got corrupt badly and the symptoms are very similar to what Eddy described

After a (hardware) crash yesterday, I was unable to boot up due to unrecoverable ide errors (according to the printk()s) when accessing the root filesystem's journal for recovery. Unable to recover, I tried deleting the has_journal option, but that was disallowed given that the needs_recovery flag was set. I saw no way to unset that flag. Unable to access the backups (they were on a fw

------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/ext3/fsync.c:50! invalid operand: 0000 [#1] CPU: 0 EIP: 0060:[<b0187d38>] Not tainted VLI EFLAGS: 00010296 (2.6.13.1) EIP is at ext3_sync_file+0x58/0xf0 eax: 00000068 ebx: bf4a479c ecx: b03cffac edx: b03cffac esi: b0398cfc edi: b2b8f1c8 ebp: c13bcf60 esp: c13bcf18 ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068 Process aptitude

'df' doesn't report my root partition, but does report my /boot partition when both are mounted with <type> auto. But when mounted with <type> ext3, both partitions are reported. Details: The system has mount-2.11m, tune2fs-1.25 and df (fileutils) 4.1 I just created an ext3 fs on a new Debian Woody install initially running linux-2.2.19 on ext2, but upgraded to

Hi I'm experiencing some problems on a harddisk (it has crashed for no known reason), and in pursuit of getting some of the data out of the disk I'm learning to use the e2fs progs package. Origianlly I used version 1.38, but after experiencing segfaults in e2fsck -which now is solved, I upgraded to 1.39, but now I have hit another problem (on another partition): The partition was

On Apr 29, 2004 14:15 +0200, David Mart?nez Moreno wrote: > Hello all. I'm writing to all the people in charge of ext3 fs > > Apr 29 12:21:21 arsinoe kernel: EXT3-fs error (device sda7): ext3_free_blocks: Freeing blocks not in datazone - block = 1071716394, count = 1 You need to run "e2fsck -f /dev/sda7" on the unmounted filesystem. There is some sort of corruption

Thank you very much for the help with my problems after I changed ext2 in ext3. So far, everything is now running smootly. However, tune2fs -l /dev/hdb2 delivers among a long output one line Fls features : has_journal needs_recovery What does this mean and how can I perform such a recovery ? Thanks in advance Edgar -- ----------------------------------- Dr.-Ing. Edgar Alwers

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

Hopefully, someone can tell me if this is OK. I recently had a problem with my system and had to do a complete restore. Fortunately, I had made a full backup just the day before. My filesystems are Ext3 (why else would I be posting this here?). :) Anyway, when I originally changed my filesystems from Ext2 to Ext3, I did while they were still mounted. As a result, the journal file was visible.

On 6/25/13 3:13 AM, Folkert van Heusden wrote: > Hi, > > I have a system with an ext4 filesystem with its journal on an other > device (an SSD). > Now this SSD dropped of the sata bus so the filesystem went r/o. > I would like to remove the journal but it says it can't because > needs_check is set. What does it actually say? there is no needs_check flag AFAIK. > I

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