Re: resize2fs failing--how to resize my fs?

[Michael Stumpf <mjstumpf@pobox.com>]

Nope.  Unmounted.  But incase you didn't read the full thing, I did 
solve the problem by adding swap and using a simple "resize2fs 
/dev/my_vol_grp/my_log_vol".


Callahan, Tom wrote:

>Was this resize done while the FS was mounted?
>
>Thanks,
>Tom Callahan
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
>[mailto:linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org]On Behalf Of Michael Stumpf
>Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 3:33 PM
>To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: resize2fs failing--how to resize my fs?
>
>
>Michael Stumpf wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I get this from the latest stable resize2fs:
>>
>>[root@foo parted]# resize2fs /dev/my_vol_grp/my_log_vol
>>resize2fs 1.38 (30-Jun-2005)
>>Resizing the filesystem on /dev/my_vol_grp/my_log_vol to 488390656 
>>(4k) blocks.
>>Killed
>>
>>Parted (again, latest stable) tells me the following:
>>Using /dev/mapper/my_vol_grp-my_log_vol
>>(parted) resize 1 0 
>>100%                                                 No 
>>Implementation: This ext2 file system has a rather strange layout!  
>>Parted can't resize this (yet).
>>(parted)
>>Similar results from ext2resize/ext2online.  This is an ordinary ext3 
>>fs, living inside an LVM2 that has already been increased to 
>>accomodate (used all free extents)..  I've resized it down and up 
>>before, though it is possible I am resizing it larger than it has been 
>>before (1.8TB).
>>Not sure what's up.  Any advice welcome; my research in this has me 
>>getting a bit nervous about lvm2 bugs causing loss of data.  While I 
>>want a single resilient (via raid 5) volume, I may be willing to ditch 
>>a whole layer of software (lvm2) to get some security.
>>    
>>
>
>
>Surprised noone has hit this before.  It turns out that somehow my swap 
>space disappeared in a system migration.  This became more obvious as I 
>explicitly tried to extend the fs to a lower limit (438390656), where 
>resize2fs worked for a while, then informed me that it couldn't allocate 
>some memory.
>
>Add 512mb of swap and problem solved.. never used more than ~100mb of 
>swap (256mb main memory).
>
>Hope this helps someone.
>  
>