Re: Is this a gmirror bug?
? I think we must be talking about something different. In any event, what we have works quite well and I'm not about to change the process at this point... we already talked on priv and everything got explained :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
>I think he's refering to dumping the partitions of an already >installed "master system" into files, and then restoring them >into the partitions of the "other systems" as intended. This >would surely be easier than to pkg_add the software needed on >the "other systems"... We do follow that general mechanism, as far as cloning an existing system is concerned. You still have to create the original system though, and that's what I was referring to... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is this a gmirror bug?
On Thu, 28 May 2009 06:12:25 -0700, "Peter Steele" wrote: > >good but seems quite overcomplex expecially this pkg_add. > > > >why just not to compress whole filesystem(s) by tar+gzip? > > ? > > I think we must be talking about something different. In any event, what > we have works quite well and I'm not about to change the process at this > point... I think he's refering to dumping the partitions of an already installed "master system" into files, and then restoring them into the partitions of the "other systems" as intended. This would surely be easier than to pkg_add the software needed on the "other systems"... -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
>good but seems quite overcomplex expecially this pkg_add. > >why just not to compress whole filesystem(s) by tar+gzip? ? I think we must be talking about something different. In any event, what we have works quite well and I'm not about to change the process at this point... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
that do zcat [partition image.gz] >/dev/partition We have a two step process. First we run a script that creates the master image as a tgz. The image is created at an alternate root using the -C option of pkg_add and the DESTDIR option of the various OS install scripts. We only run this script when we need to make a change to the master image. We use this image to create bootable USB sticks, and when a system is booted from one of these sticks there is automatic startup logic that clones the disk onto the target hard drive of the box (configuring the good but seems quite overcomplex expecially this pkg_add. why just not to compress whole filesystem(s) by tar+gzip? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
>How this "reimaging" work if i may ask? bootable DVD with unix and script >that do zcat [partition image.gz] >/dev/partition We have a two step process. First we run a script that creates the master image as a tgz. The image is created at an alternate root using the -C option of pkg_add and the DESTDIR option of the various OS install scripts. We only run this script when we need to make a change to the master image. We use this image to create bootable USB sticks, and when a system is booted from one of these sticks there is automatic startup logic that clones the disk onto the target hard drive of the box (configuring the partitions and mirrors in the process) and then shuts the box down. We then simply have to remove the USB stick and reboot the box, and the system comes up with a clean OS. The whole cloning process only takes five minutes or so, and we can do multiple systems at a time using multiple USB drives. Works extremely well. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
does it detects errors and fix them? after fsck is it ok or still nonsense in Used? Unfortunately I did not do the fsck. We have an automated reimaging process that lets me rebuild a system in less than five minutes so I decided for expediency to do this. If I see this happen again though, I'll run the fsck... and if it will fix a problem, make "master images" again with this or it will bring error back. How this "reimaging" work if i may ask? bootable DVD with unix and script that do zcat [partition image.gz] >/dev/partition ? that's how i do this in places there is a requirement of running windows. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
>did you checked that partitions with fsck? (fsck_ffs -y) > >does it detects errors and fix them? >after fsck is it ok or still nonsense in Used? Unfortunately I did not do the fsck. We have an automated reimaging process that lets me rebuild a system in less than five minutes so I decided for expediency to do this. If I see this happen again though, I'll run the fsck... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0d 4058062 -377792 4111210 110%/tmp /dev/mirror/gm0e 15231278 -113942 14126718 101%/var then? I always assumed that a disk occupation > 100% would go into this reserved area, which would turn the Capacity field to be more than 100%, and not less than 0%? This is the case when I have more data on a UFS partition than it "is allowed to"... I've seen this before a few times, but never something less than 0%. I've reimaged the system to correct it. Will have to see if it happens again... did you checked that partitions with fsck? (fsck_ffs -y) does it detects errors and fix them? after fsck is it ok or still nonsense in Used? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Is this a gmirror bug?
>Wouldn't it look like > >Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on >/dev/mirror/gm0d 4058062 -377792 4111210 110%/tmp >/dev/mirror/gm0e 15231278 -113942 14126718 101%/var > >then? I always assumed that a disk occupation > 100% would go into >this reserved area, which would turn the Capacity field to be more >than 100%, and not less than 0%? This is the case when I have more >data on a UFS partition than it "is allowed to"... I've seen this before a few times, but never something less than 0%. I've reimaged the system to correct it. Will have to see if it happens again... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is this a gmirror bug?
On Tue, 26 May 2009 16:05:22 -0700, Chris Cowart wrote: > 10% of the disk space is reserved for the superuser. The 10% free > mark is what shows as 0% in df. If you're negative, it means you've > tapped into the super-user reserve. This is not good, because it means > you've lost a lot of the FS-level optimizations from UFS. Wouldn't it look like Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0d 4058062 -377792 4111210 110%/tmp /dev/mirror/gm0e 15231278 -113942 14126718 101%/var then? I always assumed that a disk occupation > 100% would go into this reserved area, which would turn the Capacity field to be more than 100%, and not less than 0%? This is the case when I have more data on a UFS partition than it "is allowed to"... -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Is this a gmirror bug?
Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > I've seen this kind of thing appear in my df output: > > linprocfs 4 4 0 100%/proc > > > > /dev/mirror/gm0d 4058062 -377792 4111210 -10%/tmp > > > > /dev/mirror/gm0e 15231278 -113942 14126718-1%/var > > > > /dev/ad10s3e121487580 4 111768570 0%/v3 > > > > /dev/ad8s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v2 > > > > /dev/ad6s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v1 > > > > /dev/ad4s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v0 > > > > > > > > It's showing that two partitions in my gm0 partition are below 0% > > capacity. This is clearly wrong, but what does it mean? > > > it has nothing to do with gmirror - no matter if it's virtual disk (gm0 > that case) or physical, partition or not, it's just block device to UFS. > > definitely it is some problem but with UFS here. > > unmount this filesystems and do fsck_ffs -y on them Nothing is wrong. 10% of the disk space is reserved for the superuser. The 10% free mark is what shows as 0% in df. If you're negative, it means you've tapped into the super-user reserve. This is not good, because it means you've lost a lot of the FS-level optimizations from UFS. -- Chris Cowart Network Technical Lead Network & Infrastructure Services, RSSP-IT UC Berkeley pgp4eFf8CObOK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is this a gmirror bug?
I've seen this kind of thing appear in my df output: linprocfs 4 4 0 100%/proc /dev/mirror/gm0d 4058062 -377792 4111210 -10%/tmp /dev/mirror/gm0e 15231278 -113942 14126718-1%/var /dev/ad10s3e121487580 4 111768570 0%/v3 /dev/ad8s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v2 /dev/ad6s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v1 /dev/ad4s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v0 It's showing that two partitions in my gm0 partition are below 0% capacity. This is clearly wrong, but what does it mean? it has nothing to do with gmirror - no matter if it's virtual disk (gm0 that case) or physical, partition or not, it's just block device to UFS. definitely it is some problem but with UFS here. unmount this filesystems and do fsck_ffs -y on them ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Is this a gmirror bug?
I've seen this kind of thing appear in my df output: # df Filesystem 1K-blocksUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on /dev/mirror/gm0a 5077038 1685050 298582636%/ devfs 1 1 0 100%/dev linprocfs 4 4 0 100%/proc /dev/mirror/gm0d 4058062 -377792 4111210 -10%/tmp /dev/mirror/gm0e 15231278 -113942 14126718-1%/var /dev/ad10s3e121487580 4 111768570 0%/v3 /dev/ad8s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v2 /dev/ad6s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v1 /dev/ad4s3e 121487580 4 111768570 0%/v0 It's showing that two partitions in my gm0 partition are below 0% capacity. This is clearly wrong, but what does it mean? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
