From: Klaus Strebel <klaus.strebel@gmx.net>
To: jamesb@loreland.org
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: problem with latest xfsprogs progress code
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:08:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45AE2DDF.5000602@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53858.193.203.83.22.1169031614.squirrel@colo.loreland.org>
James Braid schrieb:
> I'm now seeing the following output - it's been sitting at this point for
> over 13 hours now... earlier versions of xfs_repair would finish quite a
> bit faster. Any ideas whats going on?
>
> - 03:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 03:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 03:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 03:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 04:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 04:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 04:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 04:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 05:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 05:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 05:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 05:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 06:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 06:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 06:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 06:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 07:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 07:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 07:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 07:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 08:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 08:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 08:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 08:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 09:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 09:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 09:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 09:45:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 10:00:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 10:15:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
> - 10:30:37: traversing filesystem - 0 of 55 allocation groups done
>
>
>
>> Running 2.8.18 xfs_repair on a largeish (65TB, ~70M inodes) filesystem on
>> an x86_64 machine gives the following "progress" output:
>>
>> 12:15:36: process known inodes and inode discovery - 1461632 of 0 inod
>> es done
>> 12:15:36: Phase 3: elapsed time 14 minutes, 32 seconds - processed 100
>> 571 inodes per minute
>> 12:15:36: Phase 3: 0% done - estimated remaining time 3364 weeks, 3 da
>> ys, 7 hours, 30 minutes, 45 seconds
>>
>> Is this a known bug?
Hi James,
why do you think that this is a bug? You have an almost infinitely large
filesystem, so the file-system check will also run for an almost
infinitely long time ;-).
You see, not all that's possible is really desirable.
Ciao
Klaus
Btw. i wouldn't expect this xfs_repair run to finish without running out
of memory :-(.
--
Mit freundlichen Grüssen / best regards
Klaus Strebel, Dipl.-Inform. (FH), mailto:klaus.strebel@gmx.net
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
X AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-17 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-16 16:30 problem with latest xfsprogs progress code James Braid
2007-01-17 11:00 ` James Braid
2007-01-17 14:08 ` Klaus Strebel [this message]
2007-01-17 15:54 ` Eric Sandeen
2007-01-17 22:51 ` David Chatterton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=45AE2DDF.5000602@gmx.net \
--to=klaus.strebel@gmx.net \
--cc=jamesb@loreland.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.