I thought Paul's advice only applies if I was trying to figure it out
before rebooting? I'd already rebooted before sending my first email.
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 10:40 PM Otto Moerbeek <otto@drijf.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 12:39:54PM -0700, Greg Thomas wrote:
>
> > I'm definitely suffering from filesystem corruption on root. I had
> > rebooted last night with no change.
> >
> > I have no options for mounting root.
> >
> > grits# cat /etc/fstab
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.b none swap sw
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.a / ffs rw 1 1
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.k /home ffs rw,nodev,nosuid 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.d /tmp ffs rw,nodev,nosuid 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.f /usr ffs rw,nodev 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.g /usr/X11R6 ffs rw,nodev 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.h /usr/local ffs rw,wxallowed,nodev 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.j /usr/obj ffs rw,nodev,nosuid 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.i /usr/src ffs rw,nodev,nosuid 1 2
> > 16a27b4b4549ce04.e /var ffs rw,nodev,nosuid 1 2
> > /dev/sd1c /backup ffs rw,nodev,nosuid 1 2
> >
> > I need to upgrade so I can do that from scratch. This is my backup
> server
> > so the configuration is pretty simple.
> >
> > Not sure fsck output helps here?
> >
> > grits# fsck /dev/sd0a
> > ** /dev/rsd0a (NO WRITE)
> > ** Last Mounted on /
> > ** Root file system
> > ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes
> > ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames
> > ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity
> > ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts
> > ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups
> > 12852 files, 469195 used, 35516 free (44 frags, 4434 blocks, 0.0%
> > fragmentation)
> >
> > Anyway, I'll reinstall unless someone has more learning experiences for
> me.
> >
> > And thank you to Paul for giving a quick explanation of the difference
> > between df and du.
> >
> > Thanks all!
>
> fsck looks normal for a mounted filesystem.
>
> but did you try following Paul's advice to find an open file that has
> no directory entry? That is not corruption, but explains why more
> storage is in use than du shows.
>
> -Otto
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 11:39 AM Ali Farzanrad <ali_farzanrad@riseup.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I also suspected that it is a filesystem corruption.
> > > Do you have `async` mount option on your root?
> > >
> > > Sebastien Marie <semarie@online.fr> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 10:03:44AM +0200, Paul de Weerd wrote:
> > > > > df shows you how much data you can write to an fs, while du shows
> the
> > > > > disk usage of files it can find. If it can't find a file (because
> > > > > it's been deleted), it won't account for it. But if it's been
> deleted
> > > > > and still held open by some process, it would still consume disk
> > > > > space.
> > > > >
> > > > > So it looks like a process has a file open on the root filesystem
> that
> > > > > has been deleted. You're looking for a root-owned process that is
> > > > > (probably) long-running. My guess the file is in /dev/ (that's my
> > > > > crystal ball talking though).
> > > > >
> > > > > Easiest way out is generally to reboot - this stops all processes
> > > > > (d0h), dus freeing up all the resources they had tied up, including
> > > > > files that had been deleted from the filesystem. But going through
> > > > > your process list to see if you can spot something that may have
> done
> > > > > this can be a good learning experience. In general, base OpenBSD
> > > > > daemons don't behave this way.
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Paul: you should have a running process which hold
> > > > descriptor on unlinked file.
> > > >
> > > > fstat(1) could be used to see list of opened files, and specially
> > > > unlinked files:
> > > >
> > > > INUM The inode number of the file. It will be followed by an
> > > asterisk
> > > > ('*') if the inode is unlinked from disk.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > $ fstat | grep -F '* -'
> > > > [...]
> > > > semarie chrome 537 25 /tmp 48* -rw------- rwp
> > > 279793
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > here, chrome (pid 537) has descriptor 25 opened to a file on /tmp
> > > > inode=48 (unlinked), the file size is 279793 bytes.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sebastien Marie
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
>
No comments:
Post a Comment