Hello, On Mon 15-01-18 08:23:29, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > we were dealing with slow access to directories with lots of > files (large maildirs), so after some tests, I came to conclusion > that optimizing directories using e2fsck -D (on unmounted FS of course) > helps a lot. So after testing this on our test box, I did it on production > mailserver mail volume. The I decided to do some tests on newer kernel, > so I rebooted test box and got lots of fs errors.. > > I checked production box, and it got bad as well: > > lots of dx_probe:829: inode #15949784: block 35579: comm deliver: Directory hole found > messages.. > > > so I unmounted fs again, run fsck, and got zillion of: > > Inode 18378187 ref count is 2, should be 1. Fix? yes > > Unattached inode 18378194 > Connect to /lost+found? yes > > messages.. > > > after ~3 hours, I gave up, and recovered FS from backup.. checking fs after > "repair" showed that some of large mailboxes vanished completely (and appeared in lost+found) > > I think I can rule out hardware problem, since it appeared on two completely different > systems after some action.. but I'll try to prepare new test environment and reproduce it. > > What I think might be my big mistake is that I was using quite old e2fsprogs - 1.42.6, > kernel was 4.4.52 (which I know is also a bit old, we're already testig 4.14.x) > > My question is, was that some known e2fsck problem which got fixed in new version? Commit 19961cd000 "e2fsck: fix e2fsck -fD directory truncation" sounds like fixing a similar problem you've observed. So there's reasonable chance newer e2fsprogs will handle the filesystem fine. But if not, please do "e2image -r <device> - | xz -c >ext4.image" *before* running e2fsck -D and put it somewhere for download. That way we can experiment with the metadata image and see what exactly does e2fsck do wrong. Thanks! Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
