Thank you Mark. Finally I have killed the e2fsck. After restart again our lustre filesystem it seems all works OK.
We are using two 300 GB RAID 1 10K SAS drives for the combined mdt / mgs. I tried to run the e2fsck -fy because the -fn finish in 2 hours…I think there is a problem in the latest e2fsprogs because the e2fsck returned that it was repairing more inodes than our filesystem has. Regards. ============================================= Fernando Pérez Institut de Ciències del Mar (CMIMA-CSIC) Departament Oceanografía Física i Tecnològica Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta,37-49 08003 Barcelona Phone: (+34) 93 230 96 35 ============================================= > El 6 may 2016, a las 17:57, Mark Hahn <h...@mcmaster.ca> escribió: > >> More information about our lustre system: combined mds / mdt has 189 GB and >> 8.9 GB used. It was formatted with the default options. > > fsck time is more about the number of files (inodes), rather than > the size. but either you have quite slow storage, or something is wrong. > > as a comparison point, I can do a full/force fsck on one of our MDS/MDT > that has 143G or 3.3T in use (313M inodes) in about 2 hours. it is a MD > raid10 on 16x 10K SAS drives, admittedly. > > if your hardware is conventional (locally-attached multi-disk RAID), > it might make sense to look at its configuration. for instance, fsck > is largely seek-limited, but doing too much readahead, or using large > RAID block sizes (for R5/6) can be disadvantageous. having plenty of RAM > helps in some phases. > > regards, mark hahn. _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org