lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: Htree ate my hard drive, was: post-halloween 0.2
    On Oct 31, 2002  07:27 +0100, Duncan Sands wrote:
    > > EXT3 Htree support.
    > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    > > The ext3 filesystem has gained indexed directory support, which offers
    > > considerable performance gains when used on filesystems with large
    > > directories. In order to use the htree feature, you need at least version
    > > 1.29 of e2fsprogs. Existing filesystems can be converted using the command
    > > "tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/hdXXX" The latest e2fsprogs can be found at
    > > http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs
    >
    > I ran this (tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/hdXXX).
    >
    > After a bit of switching back and forth between 2.4.19 and 2.5.44,
    > fsck was run while booting 2.4.19 (the usual check because of >30
    > mounts). There was a message about optimizing directories. Booting
    > continued but (big surprise) X refused to run. It turned out that some
    > device files had vanished. Very strange. On rebooting, fsck found a
    > gazillion bad inodes. They all turned out to be from the 2.5.44 tree -
    > poetic justice I suppose! But this did not suffice. Rebooting, I got
    > "optimizing directories" again. Next fsck showed up more dud inodes.
    > After a few cycles of this, I ran
    >
    > tune2fs -O ^dir_index /dev/hdXXX
    >
    > to remove htree support. No problems since then.
    >
    > tune2fs 1.30-WIP (30-Sep-2002)

    I wonder if there is still a bug in the e2fsck code for re-hashing
    directories? It shouldn't be possible to have e2fsck complete and
    there still be an error in the filesystem (ok, sometimes it happens,
    but in those cases it spews a lot of warnings about the filesystem
    not being fixed yet and to run manually).

    What else is strange (at least to me) is e2fsck "optimizing directories"
    on a reboot. My understanding at least is that this would be done only
    when explicitly asked for, otherwise it might slow down booting a lot,
    and as you can see it adds to the possibility of corrupting the fs when
    e2fsck should only be fixing it.

    Cheers, Andreas
    --
    Andreas Dilger
    http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
    http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:4.133 / U:0.268 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site