On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
> Or the disk could just be 6+ years old, and it's just too old. If I
> were you I would just replace the hard drives and be done with it.
That's probably going to happen in the near future, yes.
>> In this case, that would have been cfdis
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 12:38:56PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Either is possible. These are an identical pair of Western Digital
> drives and they're about five years old. They *claim* to have
> 512-byte physical sectors (per hdparm -I -- full dump at the bottom)
> but I would totally believe
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 11:05:31AM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>>
>> e2fsck successfully repairs both the skeleton image and the complete
>> partition image when they are on a known-good disk.
>
> OK, so this is a storage device issue. I'd
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 11:05:31AM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> e2fsck successfully repairs both the skeleton image and the complete
> partition image when they are on a known-good disk.
OK, so this is a storage device issue. I'd be taking a very jaundiced
look at the reliability/correctness
> It could be caused by a hardware problem, or if it's a RAID array, if
> the RAID array is out of sync, it's possible for two subsequent reads
> to return something else.
It's RAID0, which I *believe* can't get out of sync, but there is much
I do not understand about RAID.
> Can you take the two
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:09:11PM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> >
> > I can't reproduce the problem on my end (see attached)
>
> Still happens for me on the real filesystem (see attached). We appear
> to be using the same version of
I'm going to have to wipe out and recreate this filesystem in order to
continue repairing this computer, but I have saved a complete image of
the partition. It's a bit too big to just send you (11GB after xz
compression) and also it contains /etc/shadow and similar. But I'm
happy to do further te
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:22:21AM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Package: e2fsprogs
> Version: 1.42.13-1
> Severity: normal
>
> When e2fsck -yf is run on the filesystem that produced the attached image
> (qcow2 format, xz-compressed, split in half for attachment)
> it reports a big long list of er
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>
> I can't reproduce the problem on my end (see attached)
Still happens for me on the real filesystem (see attached). We appear
to be using the same version of e2fsprogs. What could cause the
divergence?
zw
typescript.gz
Descriptio
9 matches
Mail list logo
