Hello On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 23:50, Pierre Etchemaite wrote: > Le lun 07 f�v 2005 13:22:51 CET, Vladimir Saveliev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit > : > > > Hello > > Hi, > > > yes, reiserfs reuses inode number of removed files for newly created > > files. However, ext2 also does that. Have you ever noticed this problem > > on other filesystems? > > No, but I'm only using rsync -H for a few weeks. The problem may also exist > with tar, but unnoticed (unless tar detects hardlinks in a different way, > or does more checks, like checking the consistency with references counters, > whatever, to avoid it). rsync handles hardlinks in a final pass, so as soon > as the verbosity level is raised, problems are easy to detect. > > I have only one server left that uses ext2. It's also saved with rsync, no > problem seen so far (a few weeks only, as I said). > But the filesystem used isn't the only difference. Usage pattern probably > matters a lot. On the system where it happens, hardlinked files are often > Maildir files (unsurprizingly) and mrtg log files (which are rotated every 5 > minutes). inodes are probably freed by mrtg, and one reused for a new email. > > > You can try to make reiserfs to not free inode numbers of removed files > > with the attached patch and check whether it helps. It decreases number > > of files which can be created on a filesystem to ~2^^32. > > I am not sure if it is enough for low traffic IMPA server. > > Ok, I can probably try this hack to verify the hypothesis.
Yes, please do that. > But what are the > drawbacks, on the long term ? Lost disk space ? What happens if all inode > numbers get allocated ? open(O_CREAT), mkdir, etc will refuse to create files. ENOMEM will be returned. > mkreiserfs ? > > Best regards, > Pierre. >
