[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OT] Re: XFS - hard drive dying

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: XFS - hard drive dying
From: "evilninja@xxxxxxx" <evilninja@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:01:06 +0200
Cc: A JM <vbtalent@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <a0f05e89050901181340d4e279@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <ecartis-08112005145056.16602.2@oss> <a0f05e8905081414221b836b83@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4300C29D.1030302@xxxxxxx> <a0f05e8905081509405b608f77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <14367.> <a0f05e8905081513583bbf3c51@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44568.> <a0f05e89050815164778b1f302@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <a0f05e89050816064058e4f533@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4302BB34.9030400@xxxxxxx> <a0f05e89050901181340d4e279@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0+ (Windows/20050721)
A JM schrieb:

I've managed to get an image file of the drive that was dying using dd_rescue and have tried to run xfs_repair -f /dev/hdb1 with the following

um, what was hdb1 again? in [1] you showed us your fstab, hdb1 is not listed there? is it part of your LVM setup? iirc it was the latter - a part of your LVM setup. if this is so and if i understand LVM correctly, you *always* work with fs-related tools on the logical volume.

so you really should try to

0) find out your lvm-setup ( /etc/lvm/lvm.conf !)
1) setup your LVM, e.g.:

  % vgcreate VGforMyth /dev/hdb1 /dev/hdb4 /dev/hdb...
  % lvcreate -n video VGforMyth

2) xfs_repair -n /dev/VGforMyth/video

but if you really have trouble with LVM you should probably ask some lvm-user [2]. i've never really used LVM, just played around with it a bit. after LVM issues are sorted out, you can go on and 1) find out what filesystem was on your logical volume and 2) run the right fsck tool.

[1] http://oss.sgi.com/archives/linux-xfs/2005-08/msg00070.html
[2] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm

PS: as to what the error shows here:

.....found candidate secondary superblock...
superblock read failed, offset 209002168320, size 2048, ag 0, rval 22

fatal error -- Success

i don't know. it's bad, it's not something i expect from any fsck tool and the message is not very userfriendly at all. win95 error messages come to my mind...aaargh.

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