Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 9 Jun 2006 11:13:59 +0300
From:      Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To:        Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com>
Cc:        fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: heavy NFS writes lead to corrup summary in superblock
Message-ID:  <20060609081359.GH54415@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
In-Reply-To: <200606081346.04908.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>
References:  <200606081346.04908.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--WIIRZ1HQ6FgrlPgb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 01:46:04PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> Our amd64 6.1-STABLE system is used to collect backup dumps from producti=
on=20
> systems (mostly -- Solaris) via NFS. When in progrss, the dumps arrive at=
 an=20
> average rate of 20Mb/s.
>=20
> Every once in a while I notice a discrepancy in the amount of used space =
on=20
> the backup FS as reported by df vs. that reported by the total du.
>=20
> Unmounting the FS and fsck-ing it fixes the problem with fsck reporting=
=20
> (despite the clean unmount):
>=20
> 	SUMMARY BLK COUNT(S) WRONG IN SUPERBLK
> 	SALVAGE? yes
>=20
> The FS is intended for very few very large files and was created=20
> with "newfs -b 65536 -O1" (no softupdates).
>=20
> This workaround (explicit fsck) is acceptable for us, but it is a sign of=
 some=20
> kind of rot, and I thought, you'd like to know...
>=20
> Yours,
>=20
> 	-mi
Wild guess: try rev. 1.673 of the sys/kern/vfs_subr.c.

--WIIRZ1HQ6FgrlPgb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFEiS3GC3+MBN1Mb4gRAn4NAKDOUaK171CGo8W458X0GrUgqzO1qgCfdJLC
c5R3cNnLyJRu4jFqWOnxDkk=
=Xq7v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--WIIRZ1HQ6FgrlPgb--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060609081359.GH54415>