Thanks Andreas, After I e2fsck'd the OST again (and once more to make sure there weren't any errors) the OST mounted cleanly. I'm not able to run the ll_recover_lost_found_objs.
[r...@oss-0-0 ~]# ll_recover_lost_found_objs -d /mnt/scratch/ost24/lost+found | tee /tmp/ll_recover_lost_found_obj.ost24 error: creating objects directory /mnt/scratch/ost24/O: Not a directory "lost+found" directory path: /mnt/scratch/ost24/lost+found The lustre FS is mounted at /scratch on the clients and I don't see a lost+found directory there either. Erik On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Andreas Dilger <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2010-01-01, at 17:20, Erik Froese wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Andreas Dilger <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> These are usually a sign that the back-end storage is overloaded, or >>> somehow performing very slowly. Maybe there was a RAID rebuild going on? >>> >> >> I don't see any hw failures or rebuild messages on the RAID. I do see >> periodic media scans going on. >> > > There definitely was corruption of the directories on the OST, consistent > with what the kernel originally reported, but it looks like it was resolved > with a minimum of further problems. You probably want to run the > "ll_recover_lost_found_objs" on this OST to restore the objects from > lost+found back to their correct locations, though that isn't strictly > necessary to bring the OST back online - it just avoids losing access to the > objects that were moved to lost+found due to the directory corruption. > > Lustre and e2fsprogs versions: >> >> [r...@oss-0-0 ~]# rpm -q kernel-lustre >> kernel-lustre-2.6.18-128.7.1.el5_lustre.1.8.1.1 >> [r...@oss-0-0 ~]# rpm -q e2fsprogs >> e2fsprogs-1.41.6.sun1-0redhat >> >> >> Then there's this interesting message: >> Dec 29 14:11:32 oss-0-0 kernel: LDISKFS-fs error (device sdz): >> ldiskfs_lookup: unlinked inode 5384166 in dir #145170469 >> Dec 29 14:11:32 oss-0-0 kernel: Remounting filesystem read-only >> >> This means the ldiskfs code found some corruption on disk, and remounted >> the filesystem read-only to avoid further corruptions on disk. >> >> >> Whenever I try to mount the ost (known as /dev/dsk/ost24) I get the >> following messages: >> Dec 29 19:25:35 oss-0-0 kernel: LDISKFS-fs error (device sdz): >> ldiskfs_check_descriptors: Checksum for group 16303 failed (64812!=44) >> Dec 29 19:25:35 oss-0-0 kernel: LDISKFS-fs: group descriptors corrupted! >> >> So it looks like the "group descriptors" are corrupted. I'm not sure what >> those are but e2fsck -n sure enough complains about them. So I tried running >> it for real. >> >> I ran e2fsck -j /dev/$JOURNAL -v -fy -C 0 /dev/$DEVICE. >> >> The first time I ran to what looked like completion. It printed a summary >> and all but then didn't exit. I sent it a kill but that didn't stop it. So I >> let it run and went back to sleep for 3 hours. When I woke up the process >> was gone but I still get the same error messages. >> >> Having a log of the e2fsck errors would be helpful. >> >> I don't have the log for the first fsck. First it logged a bunch of >> messages about the group descriptors and that it was repairing them. Then >> messages about inodes. I'm attaching the logs from the second e2fsck. >> >> >> >> >> >> I found this discussion >> http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss/2009-March/009885.html >> and tried the tune2fs command followed by the e2fsck but it hasn't exited >> yet (its a 2.7 TB OST) >> >> It might take an hour or two, depending on how fast your storage is. >> >> >> The LUN comes from a Sun STK 6140/CSM200 device which isn't reporting any >> warning, events, or errors. >> >> I deactivated the OST with lctl but it still shows up as active on the >> clients. Also lfs find /scratch -O scratch-OST000e_UUID HANGS! >> >> You also need to deactivate it on the clients, at which point they will >> get an IO error when accessing files on that OST. >> >> I didn't know that the you had to disable it on the clients as well. >> Thanks >> >> >> Are we screwed here? Is there a way to run lfs find with the OST disabled? >> Shouldn't that just be a metadata operation? >> >> >> The size of a file is stored on the OSTs, so it depends on what you are >> trying to do. "lfs getstripe" can be run with a deactivated OST. >> >> >> Cheers, Andreas >> -- >> Andreas Dilger >> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group >> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. >> >> >> <e2fsck-fy.sdz.out.post-mmp> >> > > > Cheers, Andreas > -- > Andreas Dilger > Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group > Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. > >
_______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
