On Mar 09 2016, Riku Bister <[email protected]> wrote:
> torstai 10. maaliskuuta 2016 2.45.02 UTC+2 Riku Bister kirjoitti:
>>> On Mar 09 2016, Riku Bister <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Backing up old metadata...
>>>> Uncaught top-level exception:
>>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>> [...]
>>>> (nonce, meta_old) = self._verify_meta(src, meta_raw)
>>>> File "/root/s3ql/s3ql-2.17/src/s3ql/backends/comprenc.py", line 134, in
>>>> _verify_meta
>>>> % (stored_key, key))
>>>> s3ql.backends.common.CorruptedObjectError: Object content does not match
>>>> its key (s3ql_metadata_bak_0 vs s3ql_metadata_bak_1)
>>>
>>> This looks rather fishy. Are you sure you did not try any sort of manual
>>> surgery on the backend (like moving around metadata backups)? You would
>>> have gotten the same problem on the next mount.s3ql unmount if you had
>>> not upgraded.
>>>
>>> If you did something like that, you can try to get things in order by
>>> removing the s3ql_metadata_bak* files from the storage backend, as well
>>> as the local cached copy of the metadata (.db and .param file) and then
>>> running S3QL 2.17's fsck. But no guarantees.
>>>
>> nope, but i have a backup of those files before upgrade from storage. is
>> it safe restore them and re-try? only files i dont have back up is the data
>> files
>
> Managed to fix it, removed from ~.s3ql/ mountpoint .db and .param files. i
> done nothing on storage backend.
This can not possibly fix the s3ql.backends.common.CorruptedObjectError
that you reported. You must be confusing things.
Best,
-Nikolaus
--
GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F
Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F
»Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"s3ql" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
