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

Re: [linux-lvm] PBs with LVM over software RAID

i'll try with 2.4.9 and with 2.4.9ac5
how do you think should i do it with LVM-1.0.1rc1 or rc2
i think i should try with rc1 to find whether it comes from the xfs kernel changes, as i'm currently using rc1

Andreas Dilger wrote:

On Sep 01, 2001 00:24 +0200, svetljo wrote:

it works with IMB's JFS
when i try mkfs -t reiserfs -f /dev/myData/SRC it segfaults :

[root svetljo mnt]# mkfs -t reiserfs -f /dev/myData/SRC
mkreiserfs, 2001 - reiserfsprogs 3.x.0j
LEAF NODE (8211) contains level=1, nr_items=2, free_space=3932 rdkey
|###|type|ilen|f/sp| loc|fmt|fsck| key |
| | | |e/cn| | |need| |
Segmentation fault

isn't that a bit strange that reiserfs and xfs doesn't handle it, but jfs does

It could just be lucky that JFS works, depending on access patterns.

and the one with ext2 :

[root svetljo mnt]# mkfs -t ext2 /dev/myData/SRC
mke2fs 1.22, 22-Jun-2001 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
Filesystem label=
OS type: Linux
Block size=4096 (log=2)
Fragment size=4096 (log=2)
786432 inodes, 1572864 blocks
78643 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user
First data block=0
48 block groups
32768 blocks per group, 32768 fragments per group
16384 inodes per group
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
      32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736

Writing inode tables: Segmentation fault

Then it is definitely not anything to do with the filesystem itself (although it may be with the XFS patch). Try a kernel without the XFS patch and see if this makes a difference. Maybe it is a bad interaction between XFS, RAID, LVM?

Cheers, Andreas

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