[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070315052845.GR943@1wt.eu>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:28:46 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ray-gmail@...rabbit.org
Subject: [OT] Re: New thread RDSL, post-2.6.20 kernels and amanda (tar) miss-fires
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:12:48PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 March 2007, Ray Lee wrote:
> >On 3/13/07, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com> wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 13 March 2007, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> >On Tuesday 13 March 2007, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >> >>Greetings;
> >> >>Someone suggested a fresh thread for this.
> >> >>
> >> >>I now have my scripts more or less under control, and I can report
> >> >> that kernel-2.6.20.1 with no other patches does not exhibit the
> >> >> undesirable behaviour where tar thinks its all new, even when told
> >> >> to do a level 2 on a directory tree that hasn't been touched in
> >> >> months to update anything.
> >> >>
> >> >>Next up, 2.6.20.2, plain and with the latest RDSL-0.30 patch.
> >> >
> >> >And amanda/tar worked normally for 2.6.20.2 plain.
> >> >
> >> >Next up, 2.6.21-rc1 if it will build here.
> >>
> >> It built, it booted, and its busted big time. First, with an amdump
> >> running in the background, the machine is so close to unusable that I
> >> considered rebooting, but I needed the data to show the problem. I am
> >> losing the keyboard and mouse for a minute or more at a time but the
> >> keystrokes seem to be being registered so it eventually catches up.
> >>
> >> Disk i/o seems to be the killer according to gkrellm.
> >>
> >> But to give one an idea of the fits this is giving tar, I'll snip a
> >> line or 2 from an amstatus report here:
> >> coyote:/GenesAmandaHelper-0.6 1 planner: [dumps way too big, 138200
> >> KB, must skip incremental dumps]
> >>
> >> Huh? 138.2GB? A 'du -h .' in that dir says 766megs.
> >>
> >> coyote:/root 1 4426m wait for dumping
> >> du -h says 5.0GB so that's ballpark, but its also a level 1, so maybe
> >> 20 megs is actually new since 15:57 this afternoon local. kmails
> >> final maildir is in that dir.
> >>
> >> This goes on for much of the amstatus report, very few of the reported
> >> sizes are close to sane.
> >>
> >> Now, can someone suggest a patch I can revert that might fix this?
> >> The total number of patches between 2.6.20 and 2.6.21-rc1 will have me
> >> building kernels to bisect this till the middle of June at this rate.
> >
> >In a previous email, you said you were using ext3. If that's the case,
> >there doesn't appear to be much going on in terms of patches between
> >2.6.20 and 2.6.21-rc1. The only one that even comes close to looking
> >like it might have an effect would only come in to play if you have a
> >filesystem that has ACL information, but is mounted by a kernel that
> >doesn't have ACL support.
> >
> >I have to echo wli here, I'm afraid, and recommend at least a *few*
> >bisections to help narrow down the list of suspect patches.
> >
> >There are tutorials out there for git users. I use the mercurial
> >repository, as I find the mercurial interface and workflow a lot more
> >intuitive, but it has the same capability.
> >
> >Even 2-5 bisections will greatly help others hunt the bug down.
> >
> >Ray
>
> Probably. But I've now put a week into this, and from some other clues
> I've collected, I'm beginning to think tar has a tummy ache. After all,
> and ls -lc reports totally sane mtimes. So why is tar going bonkers
> under kernels 2.6.21-rc*, with or without Cons patches?
>
> I've also spent a day now looking for a valid place to put a bugzilla
> entry against tar, but googles search results are sending me to
> gcc.gnu.org and this is NOT the correct bugzilla for a tar problem.
>
> Its no secret that with all the churn in tar over the last 5 years, worse
> churn than the kernel IMO in going from 2.0 to 2.6, that I'm not a fan of
> yet another _new_ version of tar, when what we just need is _one_ that
> works. It is not capable of executing the recovery command listed in the
> first block of every amdump file it (amdump) ever built right now, and
> I've played the equ of the 10,000 monkeys writing Shakespear for several
> hours trying. Damned frustrating is what it is.
>
> The error it reports seems to indicate that it cannot write through the
> pipes involved. But with tar's error reporting, who the hell knows for
> sure.
>
> Here is an example
> [root@...ote data]# dd if=00010.coyote._lib.1 bs=32k count=1
> AMANDA: FILE 20070314104344 coyote /lib lev 1 comp .gz program /bin/tar
> To restore, position tape at start of file and run:
> dd if=<tape> bs=32k skip=1 | /bin/gzip -dc | /bin/tar -f - ...
>
> And the elipsis is an error if not removed. Then one is supposed to be
> able to redirect tars output with the usual >/tmp/test/ syntax
>
> So:
> [root@...ote data]# dd if=00010.coyote._lib.1 bs=32k
> skip=1 | /bin/gzip -dc | /bin/tar -f - >/tmp/test/
> -bash: /tmp/test/: Is a directory
>
> which is the return from any variation in how the redirect is done.
>
> So what is it that am I doing wrong in the above command line?, so I can
> add it to my helper scripts to be published eventually on zmanda.org.
with "/bin/tar -f - >/tmp/test/", you ask bash to open the file "/tmp/test/"
for write, then start tar and pass this file as its stdout. Obviously this
is wrong. I think that what you're trying to do is send extracted files to
/tmp/test, which is what '-C' is for. Also, you need to specify a command
for tar. You didn't. I bet if you do the following, it will work :
[root@...ote data]# dd if=00010.coyote._lib.1 bs=32k skip=1 |
/bin/gzip -dc | /bin/tar -C /tmp/test/ -xf -
Now, Gene, this is becoming totally off-topic right here.
Regards,
Willy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists