Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*fs\s+corruption\s+not\s+detected\s+by\s+xfs_check\s+or\s+_repair\s*$/: 5 ]

Total 5 documents matching your query.

1. fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair (score: 1)
Author: Marco Maisenhelder <marco@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:14:17 +0200
Hi list, I have a little bit of a problem after a catastrophic hardware failure (power supply went up in smoke and took half of my server with it - luckily only one of my raid5 disks though). My xfs
/archives/xfs/2010-08/msg00134.html (14,545 bytes)

2. Re: fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:40:33 -0500
You might be able to xfs_mdrestore, mount that, remove all but the offending directory, re-metadump that, and put it out there? Just a thought, I haven't looked in further detail at your xfs_db adven
/archives/xfs/2010-08/msg00136.html (9,782 bytes)

3. Re: fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair (score: 1)
Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 09:05:25 +1000
What operation is returning EINVAL? strace should tell you that. sure what is causing the problem, yet. What kernel version and xfs_repair version are you running? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david
/archives/xfs/2010-08/msg00139.html (9,185 bytes)

4. Re: fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair (score: 1)
Author: Marco Maisenhelder <marco@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 00:53:55 +0200
*marco:/etc# ls -lrt /store/xfs_corruption/x/ ls: cannot access /store/xfs_corruption/x/db.backup2: Invalid argument ls: cannot access /store/xfs_corruption/x/db.backup1: Invalid argument total 0 ??
/archives/xfs/2010-08/msg00148.html (8,731 bytes)

5. Re: fs corruption not detected by xfs_check or _repair (score: 1)
Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 05:22:22 -0400
FYI: starting from kernel 2.6.35 you can access all the inodes even without -o inode64 and won't get these strange errors.
/archives/xfs/2010-08/msg00151.html (8,926 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu