Dave Chinner put forth on 10/11/2010 5:35 PM: > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 03:03:28PM +0100, James Braid wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 23:51, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Sounds like fragmented free space. What is the output of: >>> >>> # xfs_db -r -c "freesp -s" <device> >> >> # xfs_db -r -c "freesp -s" /dev/sdb >> from to extents blocks pct >> 1 1 2298052 2298052 40.52 >> 2 3 1568338 3337017 58.84 >> 4 7 8432 35716 0.63 >> 8 15 50 423 0.01 >> total free extents 3874872 >> total free blocks 5671208 >> average free extent size 1.46359 >> >> Which seems to say there are a few tiny pieces of free space >> available? The files that were failing to be written were a few >> hundred bytes in size. > > The error has nothing to do with the size of the files, but > everything to do with being able to allocate more inodes. Inode > allocation requires 4 contiguous blocks (for 256 byte inodes, more > for larger inodes) with alignment constraints. That means when you > run out of 8 block or larger free extents, inode allocation will > start failing and you'll get ENOSPC being reported. > >> We haven't seen any errors so far today, but xfs_fsr ran over the >> weekend, so perhaps I guess it's reorganized the filesystem. > > Only a little. xfs_fsr will not improve fragmented free space > conditions (indeed, it normally fragments free space more). The only > way to reduce the fragmentation of free space is to remove a > significant amount of data and inodes from the filesystem... Hay Dave, would a "backup/reformat/restore" help with free space fragmentation in this case? If so, could/should the OP specify anything during the mkfs.xfs reformat that may help alleviate or mitigate his problem in the future? -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
