Re: Spontaneous development of supremely large files on different ext3 filesystems

[Maurice Volaski <mvolaski aecom yu edu>]

>  > (( Note that  both of the 'old' file sizes are multiples of 8K ))
>
> That is because e2fsck doesn't know the correct size, so just uses
> the end of the last valid block (it isn't possible to have a "hole"
> at the end of the file).

It looks like more than 1 bit was different and if I understand this 
correctly, those other bit changes are the result of this after fact 
padding by e2fsck.


> The filesize is basically the same, except for the addition of a stray
> bit, way off in left field.   (( Note that  both of the 'old' file

> Yes, it looks like single-bit corruption of some kind.

So does this imply a spontaneous bit flip on a platter? Shouldn't 
that have been picked by the RAID and twice because there is dual 
parity (RAID 6)?
--

Maurice Volaski, mvolaski aecom yu edu
Computing Support, Rose F. Kennedy Center
Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University