xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: ls -l versus du -sk after xfs_fsr
From: Ludek Finstrle <luf@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:35:31 +0200
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4338128F.8000707@sgi.com>
References: <20050926071451.GA3751@soptik.pzkagis.cz> <4338128F.8000707@sgi.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i
> >  I have problem with diferrence in filesize between ls -l and du -sk
> >after xfs_fsr (it was ok before running xfs_fsr):
> >
> ># ls -l Drafts
> >-rw-rw----  1  user  group  74646  Apr 15 17:37  Drafts
> ># du -b Drafts
> >3221303296  Drafts
> 
> can you run xfs_bmap -v Drafts

# xfs_bmap -v Drafts
Drafts:
 EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE        AG AG-OFFSET        TOTAL FLAGS
   0: [0..151]:        14693632..14693783  7 (13568..13719)     152 00101

> If the file is otherwise readable (i.e. the first 74646 bytes are right) 
> simply copying the file to a new name & back -might- solve the problem.

Yes, this helps but there are a lot of problematic files.
BTW all files are readable and it seems the data isn't corrupted.

> If you can keep the original problematic file around, though, it'd be 
> interesting to figure out what's happened here.

I'm sorry. I'm stupid. I run xfs_repair which correct it. So I lost
the original file this way :-( But I run xfs_bmap before xfs_repair.
I don't know why I didn't run xfs_repair before I wrote to xfs mail list.

> >My versions:
> >kernel 2.4.31 vanilla + ACL patches
> >xfsprogs-2.6.36-1
> >acl-2.2.31-1
> >attr-2.4.23-0

FS was created with kernel 2.4.9 (xfs 1.0.3). I don't remember
exactly the version number. Maybe it was quite older.
FS has several error (in dmesg) since (approximately) January.
So I upgraded kernel to 2.4.31 with recent utils and didn't run neither
xfs_repair nor xfs_verify.

Best regards

Luf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>