similar to: ext3 sometimes failed

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.

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

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

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

-----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: 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

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

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

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 all, Sorry to post OT but I'm a bit stuck and I thought someone may know the answer. Originally I installed Red Hat 5.2 with 2 paritions, boot and root. I upgraded to Red Hat 6 (kept the original filesystem) without a problem some time ago, but now I want to upgrade to 7.2. When trying to install the upgrade it tells me that the boot parition isnt big enough (by about 90k!) so I thought

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

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

Is there a document anywhere offering guidance on the optimum use of ext3 filesystems? Googling shows nothing useful and the Linux ext3 FAQ is not very forthcoming. I'm particularly interested in: 1. The effect on performance of large numbers of (generally) small files One of my ext3 filesystems has 750K files on a 36GB disk, and backup with tar takes forever. Even 'find /fs -type

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

Add a macro STRDUP_RESOLVE_DEVICE_OR_PATH to resolve path or device. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/daemon.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ daemon/mount.c | 13 ++----------- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/daemon.h b/daemon/daemon.h index 85eec45..f7d0c75 100644 --- a/daemon/daemon.h +++ b/daemon/daemon.h @@ -336,6

Hey everyone, Thanks for the quick help resonses once again, We got some mail saying that RAM disks were not the way to go. So we re-installed, made several partitions to use, and rebuilt xen. However, we''re still having trouble mounting partitions when xeno-linux boots. We give a physical grant of one of our newly made paritions (/dev/hda14 in particular) to the domain. But when

That seems to be the indication given by this webpage http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/ext3/ext3-usage.html However, default install of Redhat 7.2 setsup fs_passno(6th field of /etc/fstab) as 2 which asks you if you want to run fsck after an unclean shutdown The question is, is fsck required after an unclean shutdown or should one just rely on journal replay. What does fsck do when it sees an

Hi I am running a PC under Linux SuSE 7.2 with kernel 2.4.18, self compiled. I changed some days ago the partition of my second HD from ext2 to ext3 with the help of tune2fs -j /dev/hdb2 and everything was running OK. Today, I had a problem with a frozen display and I had to reboot the box cold. During the corresponding forced check I got the following messages: Quote --------- /dev/hdb2: reading

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

Hi! I'm justing in the process of setting up a new fileserver for our company. I'm installing CentOS 5.3 (64 bit) on it. One of the "problems" with it is that it has a 3.5TB filesystem for the user data which I formatted during setup as an ext3. Now my experience with our current fileserver is that a 0.5TB ext3 filesystem needs approx half an hour to complete (and kicks in