I have recently done some testing on ext3 fs for large file systems ( > 1 TB ) and ext3 has shown no problems as such . One thing I can assure you that the size has nothing to play any role in your problem . regards , Salil "God give me work, till my life shall end. And life, till my work is done" -----Original Message----- From: Poul Petersen [mailto:petersp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:56 AM To: ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: I've got an approximately 100GB ext3 FS which we recently sized down from 300GB using e2fsadm (with the disc offline obviously). I noticed the following in dmesg the other day: EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14827639 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14041793 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14827672 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14827754 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14827752 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14827753 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15074206 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 14205567 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 29573367 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 13647877 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15253505 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15106867 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15073284 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15140401 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 37093790 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15140403 EXT3-fs error (device lvm(58,8)): ext3_get_inode_loc: bad inode number: 15140402 I took this disc offline and ran fsck twice. It found a few errors the first time and none the second. I then rebooted the server, but the errors returned. The obvious next step would seem to be to build a new file-system and tar copy the data. Does it seem reasonable that the shrink could have corrupted the inode table? There is a lot going on with this setup (could be LVM, ext3online_resize, etc), so mostly I'm just curious if it is reasonable that the shrink could have been responsible or if there is some other component I should examine. Thoughts? RedHat 7.2 kernel linux-2.4.19 lvm-1.0.6 ext3-2.4 + online_resize patch e2fsprogs-1.28 w/ ext3resize ext2resize-1.1.18 (CVS actually) RAID5 - 4 discs on SAN, qla2200 driver (6.04.00) Thanks, -poul _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
