From digvijoy_chatterjee at infosys.com Tue Aug 2 10:27:59 2005 From: digvijoy_chatterjee at infosys.com (digz) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 15:57:59 +0530 Subject: WHY fdisk and df, /etc/fstab differ? In-Reply-To: <200508021526.12715.digvijoy_chatterjee@infosys.com> References: <200508021526.12715.digvijoy_chatterjee@infosys.com> Message-ID: <200508021557.59711.digvijoy_chatterjee@infosys.com> Can anyone explain this output what is ID ee and EFI GPT and how is ext2 or ext3 functioning under such a partitioning scheme and more how do i create new partitions on this hard-disk , this is RHEL3 on Itanium . ============================================================================== > [root at advaitha /]# fdisk -l > > Disk /dev/sda: 146.8 GB, 146815737856 bytes > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 17849 cylinders > Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes > > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/sda1 1 17850 143374743+ ee EFI GPT > > Disk /dev/sdb: 36.4 GB, 36420075520 bytes > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 4427 cylinders > Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes > > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/sdb1 1 4428 35566479+ ee EFI GPT > > Disk /dev/sdc: 36.4 GB, 36420075520 bytes > 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 4427 cylinders > Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes > > Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System > /dev/sdc1 1 4428 35566479+ ee EFI GPT ========================================================================================= > [root at advaitha /]# df -h > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sda5 9.9G 4.8G 4.6G 52% / > /dev/sda3 100M 4.5M 96M 5% /boot/efi > /dev/sda10 4.9G 214M 4.4G 5% /home > /dev/sda4 20G 34M 19G 1% /opt > none 997M 0 997M 0% /dev/shm > /dev/sda9 4.9G 33M 4.6G 1% /tmp > /dev/sda6 15G 2.0G 12G 15% /usr > /dev/sda8 9.7G 242M 8.9G 3% /usr/local > /dev/sda7 15G 8.1G 5.7G 59% /var > /dev/cdrom 2.6G 2.6G 0 100% /mnt ========================================================================================= > [root at advaitha /]# cat /etc/fstab > LABEL=/ / ext3 defaults 1 1 > /dev/sda3 /boot/efi vfat defaults 0 0 > none /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 > LABEL=/home /home ext3 defaults 1 2 > LABEL=/opt /opt ext3 defaults 1 2 > none /proc proc defaults 0 0 > none /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 > LABEL=/tmp /tmp ext3 defaults 1 2 > LABEL=/usr /usr ext3 defaults 1 2 > LABEL=/usr/local /usr/local ext3 defaults 1 2 > LABEL=/var /var ext3 defaults 1 2 > /dev/sda11 swap swap defaults 0 0 > /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom udf,iso9660 > noauto,owner,kudzu,ro 0 0 ============================================================================================= [root at advaitha /]# cat /proc/mounts rootfs / rootfs rw 0 0 /dev/root / ext3 rw 0 0 /proc /proc proc rw 0 0 none /dev/pts devpts rw 0 0 usbdevfs /proc/bus/usb usbdevfs rw 0 0 /dev/sda3 /boot/efi vfat rw 0 0 /dev/sda10 /home ext3 rw 0 0 /dev/sda4 /opt ext3 rw 0 0 none /dev/shm tmpfs rw 0 0 /dev/sda9 /tmp ext3 rw 0 0 /dev/sda6 /usr ext3 rw 0 0 /dev/sda8 /usr/local ext3 rw 0 0 /dev/sda7 /var ext3 rw 0 0 /dev/cdrom /mnt iso9660 ro 0 0 Thanks and Regards Digz **************** CAUTION - Disclaimer ***************** This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you are not to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves the right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the Infosys e-mail system. ***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS*** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From evilninja at gmx.net Tue Aug 2 15:23:43 2005 From: evilninja at gmx.net (evilninja) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 17:23:43 +0200 Subject: WHY fdisk and df, /etc/fstab differ? In-Reply-To: <200508021557.59711.digvijoy_chatterjee@infosys.com> References: <200508021526.12715.digvijoy_chatterjee@infosys.com> <200508021557.59711.digvijoy_chatterjee@infosys.com> Message-ID: <42EF8FFF.5040904@gmx.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 digz schrieb: > > Can anyone explain this output what is ID ee and EFI GPT % sfdisk -T | grep ^ee ee EFI GPT So partition type "ee" stands for "EFI GPT". Perhaps the Intel documentation is helpful: http://developer.intel.com/technology/efi/ > and how is ext2 or > ext3 functioning under such a partitioning scheme and more how do i create > new partitions on this hard-disk , this is RHEL3 on Itanium . afaics creating partitions is done by fdisk & co as usual, EFI just sits between the bootloader and the hardware/bios. the fs created on top of the (special) partition shouldn't care about it. Christian. - -- BOFH excuse #428: Firmware update in the coffee machine -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC74/+C/PVm5+NVoYRAk7nAJ9sYU1Fh30JyodG50gHnVSNR3j2QgCg3AQA 3cSExp+QPfKqP5IdVux6/4E= =HCVh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From puhuri at iki.fi Mon Aug 8 12:57:59 2005 From: puhuri at iki.fi (Markus Peuhkuri) Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 15:57:59 +0300 Subject: Strange corruption (?) problem In-Reply-To: <1122294259.42e4d9f34b277@webmail.teilam.gr> References: <1122294259.42e4d9f34b277@webmail.teilam.gr> Message-ID: <42F756D7.5080201@iki.fi> Professor Stafylopaths wrote: >Hello, > >I seem to have a strange problem with an ext3 fs partition. >Whenever I transfer several files to this partition and compare >the md5 and sha1 sums with the originals don't match. Seems like > > I would first suspect memory problem. Run memtest86 to check your system. I had few years ago similar problem as I transfered lots of files (that time large 18 GB disk). Luckyly, before deleting original files checked those with 'gzip -t' that failed... From r3pek at gentoo.org Wed Aug 10 22:58:24 2005 From: r3pek at gentoo.org (Carlos Silva) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 23:58:24 +0100 Subject: [BUG?] probable underflow on file date on ext2/3 filesystems Message-ID: <1123714704.13129.3.camel@localhost> Hi guys, a user at Gentoo Bugzilla, reported that he archives files with a artificial timestamp of 1970-01-01 on an ext3 partition on his amd64 box. After remounting that partition, the file date becomes 2106-02-07. I confirmed this bug and also tested it on several other partitions (xfs, reiserfs) and they don't have this problem, just ext2 and ext3 have it. This problem also doesn't occur in x86, only on amd64 (as far as i tested). If any more info is needed, just mail me. The link to the bug is http://bugs.gentoo.org/101723 Carlos Silva (cc me as i'm not on the ext2/3 lists) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From kapil.sampath at wipro.com Thu Aug 11 08:56:38 2005 From: kapil.sampath at wipro.com (kapil.sampath at wipro.com) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:26:38 +0530 Subject: URGENT: How to recover ext3 files? Message-ID: <2FEE63312285CF428A8480B07AC1C359B7479B@CHN-SNR-MBX01.wipro.com> Hi, After panic boot, I have executed fsck for the mount point and we couldn't find a single file. We have lot of directories under lost+found like this #3194985. Can anyone tell me how to recover the data from this folder? This is urgent. Thanks in advance for your help. Regards Kapil Sampath "Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up" - Thomas Edison -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From menscher at uiuc.edu Thu Aug 11 10:40:52 2005 From: menscher at uiuc.edu (Damian Menscher) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 05:40:52 -0500 (CDT) Subject: URGENT: How to recover ext3 files? In-Reply-To: <2FEE63312285CF428A8480B07AC1C359B7479B@CHN-SNR-MBX01.wipro.com> References: <2FEE63312285CF428A8480B07AC1C359B7479B@CHN-SNR-MBX01.wipro.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, kapil.sampath at wipro.com wrote: > After panic boot, I have executed fsck for the mount point and we > couldn't find a single file. We have lot of directories under lost+found > like this #3194985. > > Can anyone tell me how to recover the data from this folder? This is > urgent. I'm not sure I understand... are there files in those directories? If so, then just move the directories out of lost+found, and give them reasonable names, and you're done. This is what usually happens. If the directories are all empty, then you have a much more serious problem. Do you have backups? Damian Menscher -- -=#| Physics Grad Student & SysAdmin @ U Illinois Urbana-Champaign |#=- -=#| 488 LLP, 1110 W. Green St, Urbana, IL 61801 Ofc:(217)333-0038 |#=- -=#| 4602 Beckman, VMIL/MS, Imaging Technology Group:(217)244-3074 |#=- -=#| www.uiuc.edu/~menscher/ Fax:(217)333-9819 |#=- -=#| The above opinions are not necessarily those of my employers. |#=- From sct at redhat.com Thu Aug 11 10:43:45 2005 From: sct at redhat.com (Stephen C. Tweedie) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:43:45 +0100 Subject: URGENT: How to recover ext3 files? In-Reply-To: <2FEE63312285CF428A8480B07AC1C359B7479B@CHN-SNR-MBX01.wipro.com> References: <2FEE63312285CF428A8480B07AC1C359B7479B@CHN-SNR-MBX01.wipro.com> Message-ID: <1123757024.1870.20.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> Hi, On Thu, 2005-08-11 at 09:56, kapil.sampath at wipro.com wrote: > After panic boot, I have executed fsck for the mount point and we > couldn?t find a single file. We have lot of directories under > lost+found like this #3194985. > Can anyone tell me how to recover the data from this folder? This is > urgent. It sounds like the root directory of your filesystem was lost. What happens then is that a new root and /lost+found directory will be created, and all inodes in the system which could be found will have been relinked into the new /lost+found. So you'll have lost the names of a lot of files, but their contents may still be intact. And as long as the subdirectories under / were not lost, they will also still be intact, so any files beneath them will still have the correct filenames, in subdirs of /lost+found. Basically you'll just have to go through the files and directories in /lost+found renaming them back to their correct filenames. That will involve manually examining their contents to work out where in the recreated root directory to rename them to. Cheers, Stephen From mb/ext3 at dcs.qmul.ac.uk Fri Aug 19 12:32:29 2005 From: mb/ext3 at dcs.qmul.ac.uk (Matt Bernstein) Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:32:29 +0100 (BST) Subject: FSCK of corrupted ext3 filesystem In-Reply-To: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> References: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> Message-ID: On May 23 Darryl Bond wrote: > I have a 1.3TB ext3 filesystem that has been in service for about 3 months. > About 6 days ago the Emulex fibrechannel controller logged a SCSI error and > the filesystem changed to RO. > It appears that the filesystem instantly changes to RO and prevents the > journal from working, therefore invalidating the filesystem. > The filesystem was unmounted and a remount was attempted. The mount failed due > to errors and an fsck came up with errors. > > Top output looks like this: > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 4562 root 25 0 780m 214m 236 R 99.9 42.6 6211:44 > fsck.ext3 I'm seeing something rather similar, and not for the first time :-\ The MD layer failed a drive (on a 3ware Escalade card), but somehow the fs got wind of this and aborted the journal. My fsck is on an Opteron, it's entirely CPU-bound, occupying about 1.4G of my 2G RAM, stuck in pass 2 six days in. My strace isn't picking up any calls. My question is basically the same as Darryl's. How long do I give it? (I did SIGKILL an earlier invocation as I hadn't passed the "-y" option.) As my volume is all backup data, I'm willing to poke at it with debugfs if people on this list think it's worth a try. Maybe I can mark it as not having errors, and try to mount it? Or maybe there's a way of making fsck less thorough? I don't like the idea of not having backups for more than a week. What I did last time this happened was to run mke2fs and start again from scratch. Can I do better this time? Matt From sct at redhat.com Thu Aug 25 11:29:39 2005 From: sct at redhat.com (Stephen C. Tweedie) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:29:39 +0100 Subject: FSCK of corrupted ext3 filesystem In-Reply-To: References: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> Message-ID: <1124969379.1884.7.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> Hi, On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 13:32, Matt Bernstein wrote: > My fsck is on an Opteron, it's entirely CPU-bound, occupying about 1.4G of > my 2G RAM, stuck in pass 2 six days in. My strace isn't picking up any > calls. > > My question is basically the same as Darryl's. How long do I give it? Which version of e2fsprogs? There were some serious algorithmic inefficiencies in some really old versions that could explain this sort of thing. --Stephen From tytso at mit.edu Thu Aug 25 16:16:38 2005 From: tytso at mit.edu (Theodore Ts'o) Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 12:16:38 -0400 Subject: FSCK of corrupted ext3 filesystem In-Reply-To: <1124969379.1884.7.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> References: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> <1124969379.1884.7.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> Message-ID: <20050825161638.GB11696@thunk.org> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 12:29:39PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 13:32, Matt Bernstein wrote: > > > My fsck is on an Opteron, it's entirely CPU-bound, occupying about 1.4G of > > my 2G RAM, stuck in pass 2 six days in. My strace isn't picking up any > > calls. > > > > My question is basically the same as Darryl's. How long do I give it? What sort of messages was e2fsck printing beforehand? > Which version of e2fsprogs? There were some serious algorithmic > inefficiencies in some really old versions that could explain this sort > of thing. "Very old" here means version _before_ e2fsprogs 1.28 (released August 31, 2002). So if you are using a distribution which is more than three years old (in an industry where two years == infinity :-), that's almost certainly the explanation. - Ted From dbond at nrggos.com.au Thu Aug 25 21:10:36 2005 From: dbond at nrggos.com.au (Darryl Bond) Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 07:10:36 +1000 Subject: FSCK of corrupted ext3 filesystem In-Reply-To: <20050825161638.GB11696@thunk.org> References: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> <1124969379.1884.7.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> <20050825161638.GB11696@thunk.org> Message-ID: <430E33CC.3020904@nrggos.com.au> Hi, I stopped my 1.3TB ext3 fsck after 2 weeks, mounted ro and copied what I could. Fedora Core2 e2fsprogs-1.35-7.1 I have been using JFS since and have had several corruptions of the JFS due to strange SAN faults (Emulex HBA and Apple XServe RAID). I have been able to recover the JFS in a couple of minutes. I'm still trying to get to the bottom of the SAN faults. Darryl Theodore Ts'o wrote: >On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 12:29:39PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > > >>Hi, >> >>On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 13:32, Matt Bernstein wrote: >> >> >> >>>My fsck is on an Opteron, it's entirely CPU-bound, occupying about 1.4G of >>>my 2G RAM, stuck in pass 2 six days in. My strace isn't picking up any >>>calls. >>> >>>My question is basically the same as Darryl's. How long do I give it? >>> >>> > >What sort of messages was e2fsck printing beforehand? > > > >>Which version of e2fsprogs? There were some serious algorithmic >>inefficiencies in some really old versions that could explain this sort >>of thing. >> >> > >"Very old" here means version _before_ e2fsprogs 1.28 (released August >31, 2002). So if you are using a distribution which is more than >three years old (in an industry where two years == infinity :-), >that's almost certainly the explanation. > > - Ted > > > > DISCLAIMER The contents of this electronic message and any attachments are intended only for the addressee and may contain legally privileged, personal, sensitive or confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, and have received this email, any transmission, distribution, downloading, printing or photocopying of the contents of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. Any legal privilege or confidentiality attached to this message and attachments is not waived, lost or destroyed by reason of delivery to any person other than intended addressee. If you have received this message and are not the intended addressee you should notify the sender by return email and destroy all copies of the message and any attachments. Unless expressly attributed, the views expressed in this email do not necessarily represent the views of the company. From mb/ext3 at dcs.qmul.ac.uk Fri Aug 26 12:16:34 2005 From: mb/ext3 at dcs.qmul.ac.uk (Matt Bernstein) Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 13:16:34 +0100 (BST) Subject: FSCK of corrupted ext3 filesystem In-Reply-To: <20050825161638.GB11696@thunk.org> References: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> <1124969379.1884.7.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> <20050825161638.GB11696@thunk.org> Message-ID: On Aug 25 Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > Which version of e2fsprogs? There were some serious algorithmic > inefficiencies in some really old versions that could explain this sort > of thing. e2fsprogs-1.37-4 from Fedora Core 4 x86_64. On Aug 25 Theodore Ts'o wrote: > What sort of messages was e2fsck printing beforehand? Nothing I found overly unusual. A few errors in pass 1; it reached the "checking directory structure" pass (pass 2 IIRC) and then nothing. I guess at this point I should confess that the filesystem had (as now I've trashed it again with mkfs) of the order of hundreds of millions of directory entries, and tens of millions of inodes. It is used to rsync across our staff fileserver (currently around 500G used). We "cp -rpl" the previous night before rsync-ing the current night. It's fast and makes for cheap restores at the expense of a dense fs. The same volume is our amanda holding space--so I'm afraid (as I'm about to take a holiday) I had to trash it so that I could get some vaguely recent backups before what could have been a gap of 3-4 weeks. Sorry not to be helpful Matt From tytso at mit.edu Sat Aug 27 17:07:25 2005 From: tytso at mit.edu (Theodore Ts'o) Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 13:07:25 -0400 Subject: FSCK of corrupted ext3 filesystem In-Reply-To: References: <42910D68.4090303@nrggos.com.au> <1124969379.1884.7.camel@sisko.sctweedie.blueyonder.co.uk> <20050825161638.GB11696@thunk.org> Message-ID: <20050827170725.GB27707@thunk.org> On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 01:16:34PM +0100, Matt Bernstein wrote: > On Aug 25 Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > > >Which version of e2fsprogs? There were some serious algorithmic > >inefficiencies in some really old versions that could explain this sort > >of thing. > > e2fsprogs-1.37-4 from Fedora Core 4 x86_64. > > On Aug 25 Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > >What sort of messages was e2fsck printing beforehand? > > Nothing I found overly unusual. A few errors in pass 1; it reached the > "checking directory structure" pass (pass 2 IIRC) and then nothing. > > I guess at this point I should confess that the filesystem had (as now > I've trashed it again with mkfs) of the order of hundreds of millions of > directory entries, and tens of millions of inodes. All in one directory? How may directory entries in a single directory inode, would you estimate? If this happens again, where you see no activity for more than say an hour (either on the console or on the disk drive), please consider forcing a core dump and sending me the dump along with the e2fsck binary and the distribution/rpm version of e2fsprogs on the system. I'd be very much interestedin getting to the bototm of this if it happens again. Regards, - Ted