On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 05:27, Ash wrote: > Hi > I was running a kind of crash test on JFS in which > I do a large number of filesystem operations with several threads and > crash the machine with a direct poweroff. > > On reboot, I ran fsck.jfs firstly with default options simply to replay the log. > This succeeded without reporting and problems and said that the > filesystem was marked clean. > <snip> > **Phase 0 - Replay Journal Log > Filesystem is clean. > <snip> > > Next, I ran fsck.jfs with "-f" option to verify if there are any > inconsistencies in the filesystem. > I got a few errors saying something like > <snip> > **Phase 4 - Report Problems > File system object FF106504 is linked as: /d15/run_23-10000109 > cannot repair the data format error(s) in this file. > cannot repair FF106504. Will release.
These errors should not be here. Replaying the journal is supposed to make sure that the metadata is consistent after a power-off. I can tell that you are using a recent version of jfsutils, but are you using a recent kernel? > <snip> > At completion though, it looked like fsck.jfs had found errors, > corrected them and > filesystem was marked clean > > Now, I again tried fsck.jfs with "-f" for a third time. I expected > that this time it would > not find any errors and report that the filesystem was clean. However, > it again reported > errors like > <snip> > **Phase 4 - Report Problems > File system object DF4109 is linked as: /d15 > Errors detected in Directory Index Table. Will Fix. > <snip> I'm aware of this problem. fsck didn't used to verify the contents of the directory index table. Now that it does, it points out another problem that fsck does not update this table when it removed a bad file from a directory. It's not a severe problem, but I do need to fix it. > Finally, at the 4th run of fsck, i noticed that it did not report any problems. > My question is, why did fsck report problems for the 2nd time also > even after it had > just done a full filesystem check and repair ? > I tried about 30 "crash" cycles and found that this problem got > reproduced 3 to 4 times. > Is there some other option that I need to specify to scan and fix all > problems ? Or am I missing > something here ? You're not missing anything. It's a bug. I'm more concerned about why there are errors in the first place. What kernel are you running? > > Thanks, > Ash Thanks, Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
