On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 06:59:52PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > I think that running a 17TB filesystem on ext3 is a recipe for disaster. They should use ext4 for anything larger than 16TB. It's not *possible* to have a 17TB file system with ext3. Something must be very wrong there. 16TB is the maximum you can have before you end up overflowing a 32-bit block number. Unless this is a PowerPC with a 16K block size or some such? If e2fsck is segfaulting, then I would certainly try getting the latest version of e2fsprogs, just in case the problem isn't just that it's running out of memory. Also if recovering customer data is the most important thing, the first thing they should do is a make image copy of the file system, since it's possible that incorrect use of e2fsck, or an old/buggy version of e2fsck could make things work. In particular, if they are seeing errors with multply claimed inodes, it's likely that part of the inode table was written to the wrong place, and sometimes a skilled human being can get more data than simply using e2fsck -y and praying. At the end of the day the question is how much is the customer data work and how much effort is the customer / IBM willing to invest in trying to get every last bit of data back? - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
