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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox