database mess up

[Patrick Dupre]

Hello Panu,

Thank for your advices,

So, you think that their is  not enough inodes ?
I do not really understand what is wrong.
What need to be moved on another fs (ie. with blocksize 4096) ?
/var/lib/rpm ?
/usr/lib ?
/var ?

I have /
/usr, /usr/lib, /usr/local/ /tmp, /home

Thank again.


> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009, Patrick Dupre wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Patrick Dupre wrote:
>>> 
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For a reason that I ignore my database is totallt mess up.
>>>>>> rpm --rebuilddb only rebuild iy partially.
>>>>>> The packages are installed, but rpm --rebuilddb does not see them.
>>>>>> How can I recover them without resintalling them manually ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Find the latest intact /var/log/rpmpkgs* file (ie one that got generated 
>>>>> before the db got corrupted, file size should be a good indicator) and 
>>>>> copy it somewhere safe, say /root/rpmpkgs.backup. Now you should be able 
>>>>> to make fairly good recovery with something like:
>>>>> 
>>>>> # mv /var/lib/rpm /var/lib/rpm.busted
>>>>> # mkdir /var/tmp/download; cd /var/tmp/download
>>>>> # yumdownloader `sed -e "s/.rpm$//g" /root/rpmpkgs.backup`
>>>>> # rpm -Uvh --notriggers --noscripts --justdb *.rpm
>>>>> 
>>>>> The question of course is, what got the database corrupted to begin 
>>>>> with.
>>>>> Did anything out of the ordinary happen at that time, like /var getting 
>>>>> full? Segfaults logged in /var/log/messages*? What filesystem is /var 
>>>>> on?
>>>>> 
>>>> Hello Panu,
>>>> 
>>>> The larger rpmpkgs file is the following one:
>>>> rpmpkgs-20090111
>>>> from 2008-12-30
>>>> The following one is only 462 block compared to 61748
>>>> Concerning the message files, I attached the last one, I do not see 
>>>> anything bad, the CPU0 temperature is 34 °C, so I do not thing that it is
>>>> wrong. However the -12V and +12V are wrong according to gkrellM system 
>>>> monitor. But is it right, I doubt that the machine would work with 0.63 
>>>> and 3.95 V instead.
>>>> Furthermore concerning the messages file, /messages-20090111 is empty
>>>> as well as the following one: messages-20090118
>>>> 
>>>> /var is ext3 (on /)
>>>> /usr, /usr/lib, /usr/local are lvm2
>>>> 
>>>> What do you thing ?
>>> 
>>> Nothing out of ordinary there.. what does 'stat -f /var' say on these 
>>> problematic systems (as you said you have two systems with these 
>>> problems)?
>> 
>> It gives:
>>
>>  File: "/var"
>>    ID: 590562c6b464a80b Namelen: 255     Type: ext2/ext3
>> Block size: 1024       Fundamental block size: 1024
>                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Bingo...
>
>> Blocks: Total: 3019460    Free: 1030413    Available: 876994
>> Inodes: Total: 384000     Free: 356630
>> 
>>> 
>>> Noticed from the df output in another mail that the root partition was 
>>> fairly small so it might be subject to a more or less known issue of 
>>> filesystem blocksize of 1024 (at least on ext3) causing rpmdb corruption.
>>> 
>> do you think that blocksize of 1024 is bad ?
>
> It's almost certainly the cause of the rpmdb mess you're seeing. This has 
> been seen on both Fedora and Mandriva:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=181363
> https://qa.mandriva.com/show_bug.cgi?id=32547
>
> ...and reformatting with a block size of 4096 or moving rpmdb to another fs 
> with that block size is known to avoid the problems, caused by what is 
> supposedly a kernel/fs bug.
>
> 	- Panu -
>
>

-- 
---
==========================================================================
  Patrick DUPRÉ                      |   |
  Department of Chemistry            |   |    Phone: (44)-(0)-1904-434384
  The University of York             |   |    Fax:   (44)-(0)-1904-432516
  Heslington                         |   |
  York YO10 5DD  United Kingdom      |   |    email: pd520 at york.ac.uk
==========================================================================