Received: from oss.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g5M3BZnC014897 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:11:35 -0700 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g5M3BZnN014896 for linux-xfs-outgoing; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:11:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: oss.sgi.com: majordomo set sender to owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com using -f Received: from zeus-e8.americas.sgi.com ([198.149.7.250]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with SMTP id g5M3BQnC014867 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 20:11:27 -0700 Received: from tulip-e185.americas.sgi.com (tulip-e185.americas.sgi.com [128.162.185.208]) by zeus-e8.americas.sgi.com (SGI-SGI-8.9.3/americas-smart-nospam1.1) with ESMTP id WAA18172; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 22:14:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: from snafu (cf-vpn-sw-corp-64-31.corp.sgi.com [134.15.64.31]) by tulip-e185.americas.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/SGI-server-1.7) with ESMTP id WAA21458; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 22:14:29 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: Kernel oops with XFS and NFS From: Stephen Lord To: Dave Alden Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com In-Reply-To: <20020621144927.A1528@math.ohio-state.edu> References: <20020620200647.A8102@math.ohio-state.edu> <20020621144927.A1528@math.ohio-state.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.7 Date: 21 Jun 2002 22:12:22 -0500 Message-Id: <1024715543.2828.18.camel@snafu> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 13:49, Dave Alden wrote: > Hi, > Sorry to follup to my own message, but I'm getting extremely desperate. > I'm now at the point that I can't bring the system up for more than a few > minutes before it does the oops. I'm afraid I'm going to be forced to go > back to EXT3, and once I go back I probably won't get the opportunity to > try XFS again (please don't take this as a threat, it's just a plea for > help -- I really, really, really want to stay with XFS, but with 500 users > breaking down my door I don't know if it will be an option). Does anyone > have any suggestions? > ...thnx, > ...dave alden Sorry for the lack of response from us, we are a bit thin on the ground at the moment, and there are going to be less of us around for a couple of weeks. All I can really recommend is getting the filesystems unmounted and running xfs_repair on them. Also while the fs is idle and after it is clean as far as repair is concerned, try running xfs_fsr on it. We have seen some issues with fragmented files causing problems - however, the defragmenter seems to have issues running whilst nfs is active - hence run it without the filesystem being used via nfs. Steve