Hello, I'm sorry for a long interval. AJ Lewis wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 11:28:37AM +0900, Kenji Wakamiya wrote: >>By the way, sometimes I get warnings from gfs_fsck for snapshot-LV, >>even though I froze GFS before doing lvcreate -s. >>For example, the followings are. Is this usual thing? >> >> # gfs_fsck -y /dev/vg0/lv0ss0 >> Initializing fsck >> Starting pass1 >> Pass1 complete >> Starting pass1b >> Pass1b complete >> Starting pass1c >> Pass1c complete >> Starting pass2 >> Pass2 complete >> Starting pass3 >> Pass3 complete >> Starting pass4 >> Found unlinked inode at 1929233 >> Adjusting freemeta block count (59 -> 60). >> Adjusting used dinode block count (10 -> 9). >> l+f directory at 29 >> Added inode #1929233 to l+f dir >> Found unlinked inode at 1800635 >> Added inode #1800635 to l+f dir >> Link count inconsistent for inode 25 - 5 6 >> Link count updated for inode 25 >> Pass4 complete >> Starting pass5 >> ondisk and fsck bitmaps differ at block 29 >> Succeeded. >> used inode count inconsistent: is 9 should be 10 >> free meta count inconsistent: is 60 should be 59 >> Pass5 complete >> # > > > Interesting. Have you noticed what inode gets stuck in l+f? I'm using IlohaMail-0.9-20050415, a PHP based POP/IMAP web mailer - http://blog.ilohamail.org/ on 3-nodes GFS cluster with a server load balancer. The lost file is produced in this way: 1. Reload all three HTML frames or only folder-tree frame of IMAP client mode of IlohaMail, and wait. 2. Just after reload is complete, execute "gfs_tool freeze" on any node of GFS cluster (I tried also on all nodes). 3. Create a block/volume level snapshot on file server. I tried GNBD/LVM/LinuxBox and iSCSI(sfnet-initiator-4.0.2.1)/NetApp. 4. Execute gfs_tool unfreeze. 5. Import the snapshot LV/LUN on any Linux machine, and execute gfs_fsck. By this procedure, the lost file is always an IlohaMail's cache file for IMAP folder list and each property. (/mnt/gfs/IlohaMail/data/cache/$USER.$IMAPSERVERNAME/folders) The inconsistency is sometimes not caused. I also tried to sync before/after freezing GFS, but nothing seemed to make difference. Freezing GFS suspends filesystem's activity, but doesn't it ensure filesystem level consisntency? Right now I'm using GFS on FC4-test3 with the newest kernel RPMs and the newest Cluster/GFS RPMs in: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/development/i386/Fedora/RPMS/ Thanks, -- Kenji -- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
