similar to: [long] major problems on fs; e2fsck running out of memory

Unfortunately, there has been a huge number of bug fixes for ext4's online resize since 2.6.32 and 1.42.11. It's quite possible that you hit one of them. > The 51.8% seems very suspicious to me. A few weeks ago, I did an online > resize2fs, and the original filesystem was about 52% the size of the new > one (from 2.7TB to 5.3TB). The resize2fs didn't report any errors, and

Hi Bodo and Ted, Thank you both for your responses; they confirm what I thought might be the case. Knowing that I can try to proceed with your suggestions. I do have some followup questions for you: On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:05:09PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Unfortunately, there has been a huge number of bug fixes for ext4's > online resize since 2.6.32 and 1.42.11.

I'm pulling my hair out trying to setup a mirrored logical volume. lvconvert tells me I don't have enough free space, even though I have hundreds of gigabytes free on both physical volumes. Command: lvconvert -m1 /dev/vg1/iscsi_deeds_data Insufficient suitable allocatable extents for logical volume : 10240 more required Any ideas? Thanks!, Gordon Here's the output from the

'--no-degraded' flag in the first mdadm call inhibits the startup of array unless all expected drives are present. This will prevent starting arrays in degraded state. Second mdadm call (after LVM is scanned) will scan unused yet devices and make an attempt to run all found arrays even they are in degraded state. Two new tests are added. This fixes rhbz1527852. Here is boot-benchmark

On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 11:24:51PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > The "get root inode failed" is rather unfortunate. Heh, I like your understatement. :) I think this helps answer part of my questions in my second email: I should probably try to preserve changes from last backup before getting too deep into a tricky e2fsck. At one point the fs was still mountable, so I

On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:54:24PM -0700, Keith Keller wrote: > > Heh, I like your understatement. :) I think this helps answer part of > my questions in my second email: I should probably try to preserve > changes from last backup before getting too deep into a tricky e2fsck. > At one point the fs was still mountable, so I could have tried to copy > files off first. (In a

This one has me stumped and I'm sure I must be missing something trivial. What is is eludes me. I have a 20G drive that will be replaced with a 160G drive. The /boot partition is just a standard type 83, and the swap is an 82. The system root partition is in a LV, as is the /home partition. I've upgraded hard drives dozens of times without incident, but never ona system with LVM.

Hi people, i had created encrypted device with cryptsetup/LUKS which i setup with an ext4 filesystem. This device is an external USB harddisk. When i plugin this device it will be automatically mounted by my gnome3 system (Debian Wheezey/Testing), but this week i got an error. I did ask the ask the LUKS developers what is the problem and they told me that this is an ext4 problem. The error

Hello list. I have a perfectly working PV host, with this configuration: kernel = "/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.18.8-xen-3.3.0-7mdv" ramdisk = "/boot/initrd-2.6.18.8-xen-3.3.0-7mdv.img" root = "/dev/sda1 ro" extra = "(hd0)/boot/grub/menu.lst" memory = 256 maxmem = 512 name = "sexonthebeach" uuid = "f36962f5-0dec-4708-84a0-f5b4dea48d34" disk = [

On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 07:43:12PM -0700, Keith Keller wrote: > > That's clearly a spurious error, so I checked dmesg: > > [159891.225762] EXT4-fs (dm-0): get root inode failed > [159891.227436] EXT4-fs (dm-0): mount failed The "get root inode failed" is rather unfortunate. Try running "debugfs /dev/dm0" and then use the "stat /" command. You

"R Installation and Administration", section 2.5 "Sub-architectures" describes calling specific builds of R using the call "R --arch=name". I am trying to build and install three versions of R-2.9.1, each configured with a different valgrind-instrumentation level ("Writing R Extensions", section 4.3.2 "Using valgrind"). My goal is to be able to

I've run ext3 filesystems for the last few years and I've never seen this question answered..... If a system shutsdown hard, even with journaling is it at all necessary to run e2fsck? Just curious.... Thanks -- Sam Williams samurai at acm.org +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ +"It is easy to be

How big is a file that e2fsck considers it to be a large file? 814611 blocks used (42.79%) 0 bad blocks 1 large file <----- that Thanks John Nelson

Hi, yesterday I ran e2fsck -n on a mounted file system and got: /dev/sdb1 contains a file system with errors, check forced. According to Ted, the lines that followed were not to be trusted due to the fact that the file system was mounted. But this error statement suggests to run a check with the fs unmounted. Today, we scheduled a downtime and ran the check. It came of completely clean: ~:

Hi, I'm on kernel 2.14.13-ac8 running Redhat 7.1. I've successfully converted all my file system to ext3 and is working fine for a couple of weeks. However, I did a silly thing when I e2fsck (version 1.23) an ext3 /home partiction without umounting it. Now, I believe my partiton super-block is corrupted and the system wasn't able to mount /home. I tried as suggested to do a e2fsck -b

Hi, on all of my CentOS7 VMs on different hypervisors the config file e2fsck.conf contains the line broken_system_clock = 1 I found this because on all of them, the root partition was not checked triggered by interval setting with tune2fs. Do you see similiar /default/ settings on your machines? Is it an issue only on VMs? I have no CentOS7 host on bare metal to compare. Thanks and cheers,

We?ve been seeing this a lot lately on generic CentOS 6 rpm installs: rpm -qa | grep libguestfs libguestfs-java-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64 libguestfs-java-devel-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64 libguestfs-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64 libguestfs-tools-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64 libguestfs-javadoc-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64 libguestfs-devel-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64 libguestfs-tools-c-1.16.19-1.el6.x86_64

"R Installation and Administration", section 2.5 "Sub-architectures" describes calling specific builds of R using the call "R --arch=name". I am trying to build and install three versions of R-2.9.1, each configured with a different valgrind-instrumentation level ("Writing R Extensions", section 4.3.2 "Using valgrind"). My goal is to be able to

e2fsck returns 1 in case of "file system errors corrected". We treat it as success in normal e2fsck, but fail if e2fsck is run by resize2fs. Change 'manual' execution of e2fsck to dedicated function call. --- daemon/ext2.c | 14 ++++---------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c index 5dd67c7..95a65ae 100644 ---

We have CENTOS 5.5 run on DELL server.?? Due to power system crash, server been down and up. I would like use 'e2fsck" to check file systems. Does there has way to run "e2fsck" under following conditions: 1. file systems are all ext3 2. file systems must mount. 3. e2fsck only scan file system but NO modify Thanks.