Re: UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT
From: Beardy (beardy_at_beardy.net)
Date: 08/24/04
- Next message: Coy Hile: "Re: solaris 10 build 63 and lofiadm"
- Previous message: Dave Uhring: "Re: Anyone else seeing this management trend favoring Linux?"
- In reply to: Robert Mazur: "UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT"
- Next in thread: Robert Mazur: "Re: UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT"
- Reply: Robert Mazur: "Re: UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:01:50 +0000
Robert Mazur wrote:
> I have a new v210 on which I config'd apache/tomcat, but no users
> accessing it yet, other than me to test a webapp. I needed to cycle
> the power down/up in order to place it in a rack.
Did you shut it down cleanly? Please don't pull power cables unless you
have a clustered failover scenario (and the knowledge to possibly
rebuild a server).
>
> Upon trying to restart tomcat, the system was telling me it could not
> write to the catalina log file, even as root. Tomcat (and the log
> file) is in slice 5 and still had 2 GB of space.
A filesystem can have 2TB, or 2ZB of space, but if its broke, its broke.
Put logging on the filesystem. I have only had one failure ever on a
logging FS when the log area became corrupted, but a full fsck fixed it.
>
> Desperate after trying to figure this out for a while, I restarted the
> machine and saw that when checking c1t0d0s5 the system said it was
> "not fine" and suggested running fsck. I ran fsck and got 3 or 4
> dozen of each of these when looking at s5:
> ----------------------------
> UNREF DIR I=51406 OWNER=root MODE=40755
> SIZE=512 MTIME=Aug 13 06:54 2004
> RECONNECT? y
>
> LINK COUNT DIR I=428678 OWNER=root MODE=40755
> SIZE=512 MTIME=Aug 16 06:44 2004 COUNT 0 SHOULD BE 2
> ADJUST? y
> ----------------------------
>
> Can someone tell me what these messages would indicate, and knowing
> this is a barely used system, if I should be weary of tossing it into
> production? I ran fsck twice until it didn't return any more
> unfavorable messages, and cycled the power successfully without
> errors, but I am wondering what happened?
The unref dir is where a directory structure exists, but has lost its
parent (owning) directory. The link count=0 error is where a directory
looks like its been removed, but is still referenced by other objects.
Boy, I should get royally flamed for my lack of in-depth knowledge on
this. Asbestos underwear at the ready ;-)
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
Bottom line - turn logging on on all your fileystems, patch the box up
as far as possible, and if you cannot cluster it for Production, then
toss it in, and get your CV up to date ;-)
Good luck.
- Next message: Coy Hile: "Re: solaris 10 build 63 and lofiadm"
- Previous message: Dave Uhring: "Re: Anyone else seeing this management trend favoring Linux?"
- In reply to: Robert Mazur: "UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT"
- Next in thread: Robert Mazur: "Re: UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT"
- Reply: Robert Mazur: "Re: UNREF DIR and LINK COUNT"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|