From: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [Ocfs2-users] How long for an fsck?
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 17:22:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DB21BC1.8080704@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201104230024.35576.guerrero@ice.cat>
On 04/22/2011 03:24 PM, Josep Guerrero wrote:
>> How long did the debugfs output take?
> I think about 30 minutes. No more than 50 for sure (just by looking at the
> times of the mails).
>
>> Did fsck eventually finish?
> No. I had to cancel it after it stayed 24 hours in the same state, showing the
> same message. It never moved beyond "Pass 0a", and always was using 100% CPU
> in one core. I don't know if it would have finished on its own.
>
>> BTW, you said one of the cores was at 100%. What does top show?
>> Is fsck the main contributor or is some other process spinning?
> It was fsck (I kept a top opened the whole time, and fsck always was around
> 99% CPU usage).
>
>> I have a theory as to why it is slow. But I would like some confirmation.
>> My theory had fsck have high wait%. I seem to be missing something.
> I didn't look at the wait%, but I checked the physical disk load with iotop
> and it was very low, so it didn't look like fsck was being slow because of the
> disk. In the filesystem I successfully "fscked" before (the 3 TB one that took
> less than 60 minutes), it started doing something similar (very high CPU
> usage, low disk load) but after several minutes (when the rest of the messages
> after "Pass 0a" appeared), it did just the opposite: low CPU use, high disk
> load. Both filesystems are physically on the same set of disks (the 16TB
> logical volume is an striped LVM volume that fills about 75% of the 21 physical
> disks and the 3TB is another striped LVM volume filling the remaining space of
> the same disks) so I don't think it's a problem with the physical devices (of
> course, I could be wrong).
File a bz. This will need some investigation.
BTW, how much memory does your box have?
next parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-23 0:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <201104211543.29963.guerrero@ice.cat>
[not found] ` <201104211946.32493.guerrero@ice.cat>
[not found] ` <4DB1F431.5070003@oracle.com>
[not found] ` <201104230024.35576.guerrero@ice.cat>
2011-04-23 0:22 ` Sunil Mushran [this message]
2011-04-23 14:56 ` [Ocfs2-devel] [Ocfs2-users] How long for an fsck? Tao Ma
2011-04-23 15:57 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-05-11 18:14 ` Goldwyn Rodrigues
2011-05-11 18:21 ` Sunil Mushran
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=4DB21BC1.8080704@oracle.com \
--to=sunil.mushran@oracle.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.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.