From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Drokin Subject: Re: how long is reiserfsck expected to run? Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 15:06:35 +0400 Message-ID: <20030525110635.GA2119@namesys.com> References: <200305241131.40837.pegasus@nerv.eu.org> <20030524093710.GA15753@namesys.com> <20030524222324.2580002e.pegasus@nerv.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030524222324.2580002e.pegasus@nerv.eu.org> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jure Pecar Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com Hello! On Sat, May 24, 2003 at 10:23:24PM +0200, Jure Pecar wrote: > > It can take pretty long time. > It just finished, after about 40h. > 2859 found corruptions can be fixed only during --rebuild-tree. > yay. And manual page strongly suggest backing up the partition before > --rebuild-tree. But i neither have 500gb handy nor time to do that ... Well, reiserfsck --rebuild-tree is much more robust these days. The only thing you should not have on tihs fs is images of other reiserfs filesystems in plain form (not compressed or encrypted). > Btw, how long is --rebuild-tree going to take? Even longer i guess? :) Generally speaking yes. But with the version I sent you it should be faster. It would be interesting to know how long rebuild-tree run of new reiserfsprogs will take [parts of old data sticked into fs horrors] > Has anyone been through something like this before? Is this fixable > afterall? It should be somewhat fixable, I think. Some of the files (esp. aleady deleted ones) may easily end-up in lost_found, though. > Well if it is i think i owe you (the reiserfs team) something ... what do > you prefer? :) we have this http://namesys.com/support.html page that describes ways to give us money if you feel the need to ;) > Btw this is on rh AS with their 2.4.9-e16 kernel, based on 2.4.9-ac10. I'd > say that reiserfs code in this kernel is exactly the same as in the Alan's > ac10. I'm using reiserfsprogs 3.6.6. This kernel is buggy and generally is not recommended for reiserfs operations. I wonder if you can easily stick in at least some 2.4.19 flavour? Also please use reiserfsprogs version I sent you. Bye, Oleg