On 6/1/14, 9:43 PM, Keith Keller wrote: > Hi Bodo and Ted, > > Thank you both for your responses; they confirm what I thought might be > the case. Knowing that I can try to proceed with your suggestions. I > do have some followup questions for you: > > > On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:05:09PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: >> Unfortunately, there has been a huge number of bug fixes for ext4's >> online resize since 2.6.32 and 1.42.11. It's quite possible that you >> hit one of them. > > Would this scenario be explained by these bugs? I'd expect that if a > resize2fs failed, it would report a problem pretty quickly. (But > perhaps that's the nature of some of these bugs.) Well, for what it's worth, there have been several resize fixes shipped in RHEL6/Centos6, so it's not just vanilla 1.42.11 or 2.6.32. But we walk a fine line between too much churn and risk, and fixing the serious problems, so it's possible that you hit an unfixed case. I think it's fairly hard to know without a reproducer. Your corruption looks bad enough that I tend to agree with Bodo - that it may be some more fundamental underlying storage problem. However, some semi-recent fixes, for example: resize2fs: reserve all metadata blocks for flex_bg file systems have yet to make it into RHEL6 (they will soon...) -Eric _______________________________________________ Ext3-users mailing list Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
