[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] GFS compile errors on FC3



On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:49:29AM +0200, Birger Wathne wrote:
> 
> >
> >If you could send the output of the fsck that you're seeing, I can probably
> >tell you if it's an issue or not.
> 
> Perhaps my procedure for doing this is wrong? I stop all services using 
> clusvcadm -s <service>, umount the file system and run gfs_fsck.

This is with a single node mounting GFS?  Nobody else is touching the
filesystem or disk GFS is on?

> This is very typical:
> 
> Extended attributes block out of range...removing

This is saying that an extended attribute block is either outside the valid
blocks for the filesystem...not sure why this would happen on a cleanly
unmounted fs - do you know what services you are using that use extended
attributes?  

> .
> .
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16470
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16471
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16472
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16473
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16474
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16475
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16476
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16477
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16478
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16479
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16480
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16481
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16482
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16483
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16484
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16485
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16486
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16487
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16488
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16489
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16490
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16491
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16492
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16493
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16494
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16495
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16496
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16497
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16498
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16499
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16500
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 16501
> Succeeded.
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 6016570
> Succeeded.
> free count inconsistent: is 66 should be 67
> free meta count inconsistent: is 11 should be 10
> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 6748878
> Succeeded.
> free count inconsistent: is 66 should be 67
> free meta count inconsistent: is 11 should be 10

These are likely related to the bad extended attribute above.  If an extended
attribute block is found bad, the entire extended attribute is removed. 

Regards,
-- 
AJ Lewis                                   Voice:  612-638-0500
Red Hat Inc.                               E-Mail: alewis redhat com
One Main Street SE, Suite 209
Minneapolis, MN 55414
   
Current GPG fingerprint = D9F8 EDCE 4242 855F A03D  9B63 F50C 54A8 578C 8715
Grab the key at: http://people.redhat.com/alewis/gpg.html or one of the
many keyservers out there...

Attachment: pgpieExrvy49Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]