Paolo Tealdi wrote:

I will do a newfs on saturday afternoon, after doing some backups (also on tape). After this, if the problem persists, i'll do the pass 2, 3 and 4. In my opinion something gets damaged at filesystem level after an energy block (date are similar). I did an fsck (more times) but the problem persists : probably fsck doesn't recognise the problem.

By energy block I assume you mean a power cut? It's certainly suspicious but without actually understanding what is causing the problem, hard to be sure if there is a relation. I'm struggling to understand how "ls" can show a date in 2003 for a file, while dump thinks that the inode has changed since your level 0 a few days ago. I'm no expert on the filesystem, but that's just weird. I don't see how a power cut could have done that or what problem fsck could fix


It could be important to do debugging for this problem, but it's a production disk (big) and i can't "play" with it too much.
Thanks a lot for your support.

One more thought off the top of my head. What does ls -lsak /home/.snap show? I know there can be issues with snapshots in the 5 series and having more than one snapshot can be a bad idea. I don't think that's it because your dump -S without -L showed pretty much the same as with -L, but just in case. If you do find any snapshots (I believe dump would leave one called dump_snapshot or .dump_snapshot or something obvious if it gets interrupted (by a power failure, for example) then you can delete with rm. I don't hold out much hope but it's easier than a dump/restore).

If no-one else replies here with bright ideas, you could also try posting to maybe freebsd-hackers or freebsd-fs; http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/eresources.html#ERESOURCES-MAIL

Good luck.  If you try the newfs, please let us know how it turns out.

--Alex


_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to