On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 07:53 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
> Per Jessen wrote:
> 
> > Fortunately, no customer has complained yet, but someone will if it
> > goes on for another 12-15 hours.  I really do not want to have a 2nd
> > day of this tomorrow ...
> 
> Well, looks like that was wishful thinking.  Now 34 hours and counting.
> 
> Recent output is stuff like this:
> 
> Duplicate reference to 2 block(s) beginning at offset 13952656 found in
> file system object DF192093.
> Duplicate reference to 13 block(s) beginning at offset 13952674 found in
> file system object DF192093.
> Duplicate reference to 80 block(s) beginning at offset 13952688 found in
> file system object DF192093.
> Duplicate reference to 7 block(s) beginning at offset 13952789 found in
> file system object DF192093.
> Duplicate reference to 6578 block(s) beginning at offset 13952797 found
> in file system object DF192093.
> Duplicate reference to 6579 block(s) beginning at offset 13952796 found
> in file system object DF192093.
> 
> 
> Fortunately, most people will be off work the next 4 days, so in about
> 12 hours I'll probably start rebuilding/recreating this system.  It has
> got to be working again by Monday. 
> 
> Still - Dave, any idea what could possibly have caused such a mess?? 
> This is a old(ish) SMP system, running 2.4.33, jfsutils 1.1.7.

Wow.  That is pretty old.  I've pretty much forgotten about the 2.4
kernel.  There have been a lot of bug fixes since then, but I wouldn't
know off the top of my head anything specific that would explain this.

> I tried
> upgrading to 1.1.11, but had to back down to 1.1.7 as the new utils
> refused to do an fsck.

What error did you get?  There's no reason 1.1.11 should have failed.

> The filesystem is about 140Gb in total of which
> 90Gb is used.  It's backed by a  softwarea RAID5 software I'm guessing
> the filesystem probably had some 500.000 files, with up to maybe 40,000
> in some directories.  The system was generally very busy storing new
> files (24h/day).

Do you have any plans to upgrade to a newer distribution?  JFS has
gotten a lot more stable in the 2.6 kernel than it was back in 2.4.  I'm
pretty impressed that it's been holding up this long under such a high
load.

Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion

Reply via email to