Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:29:22 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0-r574664 (2007-09-11) on oss.sgi.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.0-r574664 Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m0NHTGM3011719 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:29:19 -0800 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1201109375-122701ea0000-NocioJ X-Barracuda-URL: http://cuda.sgi.com:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Received: from mail.purevideo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 16AB2550649 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:29:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.purevideo.com (mail.purevideo.com [208.50.29.149]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ymPyvpD3IyvOZwuC for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:29:36 -0800 (PST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-ASG-Orig-Subj: RE: Repairing a possibly incomplete xfs_growfs command? Subject: RE: Repairing a possibly incomplete xfs_growfs command? Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:24:17 -0800 Message-ID: <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F02535973@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Repairing a possibly incomplete xfs_growfs command? Thread-Index: AchdauQ1LMoKfLlGTMic03LLn0M+6gAeoQ+w References: <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F0253595A@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> <20080117234604.GG155407@sgi.com> <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F0253595B@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> <20080119004018.GH155407@sgi.com> <9CE70E6ED2C2F64FB5537A2973FA4F0253596D@pvn-3001.purevideo.local> From: "Mark Magpayo" To: "Barry Naujok" Cc: X-Barracuda-Connect: mail.purevideo.com[208.50.29.149] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1201109376 X-Barracuda-Bayes: INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0000 1.0000 -2.0210 X-Barracuda-Virus-Scanned: by cuda.sgi.com at sgi.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -2.02 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-2.02 using per-user scores of TAG_LEVEL=2.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.1, rules version 3.1.40286 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/5531/Wed Jan 23 02:32:09 2008 on oss.sgi.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by oss.sgi.com id m0NHTJM3011737 X-archive-position: 14271 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: mmagpayo@purevideo.com Precedence: bulk X-list: xfs > > Was it stuck on Phase 6 all that time? With only 1GB of RAM (from your > meminfo output) and 18TB filesystem, Phases 3 and 4 will take a very > long time due to swapping. It's been stuck on Phase 6 since I came back to check on it on Monday. > > Phase 6 in your scenario should be relatively quick and light on > memory usage (500MB as reported in your other email). > > It is feasible it is deadlocked by trying to double-access a buffer, > or access a buffer that wasn't released. This is an unlikely scenario, > but it is possible. Could I break out of the process here? Seems like most of the repair work has been done... Then again, I imagine traversing the filesystem is a pretty important step. Are there any more phases after this by the way? Thanks, Mark