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

Re: [Linux-cluster] errors with GFS2 and DRBD. Please help..



----- "Koustubha Kale" <koustubha_kale yahoo com> wrote:

| Hi all,
| We have a three node GFS2 cluster on a CentOS 5.4 output of uname -a

| GFS2 errors and file system withdrawls, nodes restarting. The error in
| log is as shown below..

>Hi,
>
>What version of fsck.gfs2 did you use to fix these errors?
>
>Not that long ago, I discovered that fsck.gfs2 is not always
>cleaning everything up that it should on the first pass.
>Sometimes it finds and fixes more inconsistencies on the second
>run.  The issue will be much better when the 5.5 release is out.
>But I've found some serious problems even in the 5.5 version.
>For example, when orphaned dinodes are tossed into lost+found,
>it can sometimes get the block accounting wrong.
>
>I've got a better, faster fsck.gfs2 on my people page for
>people to try.  This one is more thorough, better block accounting
>and has added error checking, so it should do a much better job
>of cleaning things up.  It's had a lot of testing and has gotten
>a lot of positive feedback from other people too:
>
>http://people.redhat.com/rpeterso/Experimental/RHEL5.x/gfs2/fsck.gfs2
>
>This is an x86_64 version.  I recommend these steps:
>
>1. Download this experimental fsck.gfs2 to some directory
>2. Unmount the file system from all nodes
>3. Save off a copy of the file system metadata:
>   gfs2_edit savemeta /dev/device /some/file.meta
>   This saved copy means you can always go back if fsck.gfs2
>   makes some kind of mistake
>4. run the new fsck.gfs2 on the file system
>
>See if that helps the situation.
>
>

This is what I get on every run one one of the LV's i.e. Stu LV. On the other LV i.e. Fac, this new fsck_gfs2 did a bunch of stuff and exited normally.

Block 26601682 (0x195e8d2) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601683 (0x195e8d3) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601684 (0x195e8d4) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601685 (0x195e8d5) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601686 (0x195e8d6) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601687 (0x195e8d7) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601688 (0x195e8d8) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601689 (0x195e8d9) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26601690 (0x195e8da) seems to be free space, but is marked as data in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Block 26600088 (0x195e298) seems to be free space, but is marked as inode in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Pass1 complete
Starting pass1b
Pass1b complete
Starting pass1c
Pass1c complete
Starting pass2
Pass2 complete
Starting pass3
Pass3 complete
Starting pass4
Found unlinked inode at 380614 (0x5cec6)
Unlinked inode has zero size
Block 380614 (0x5cec6) seems to be free space, but is marked as inode in the bitmap.
The bitmap was fixed.
Segmentation fault


Any advise?

With warm regards
Koustubha Kale


      Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW! http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/internetexplorer/


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