CNFS corruption
Julien ÉLIE
julien at trigofacile.com
Mon Oct 26 20:37:07 UTC 2009
Hi the Doctor,
> batcher: CNFS: CNFSUsedBlock: invalid offset 12c361000, min = 18000, max = +b71b0000
0x18000 = 98 304 bytes
0xb71b0000 = 3 072 000 000 bytes
0x12c361000 = 5 036 707 840 bytes
Reading the source code, I do not see any obvious issue with the use of CNFSUsedBlock.
The only thing I see is that, at exactly two places in the code (cnfs_retrieve and
cnfs_cancel), it is called after a multiplication by the blocksize. In INN 2.5.1,
the blocksize was multiplied by 8.
So what could happen is that your CNFS buffer is seen as a new CNFSv4 buffer and
you have in the history file tokens for an old CNFSv3 buffer.
0x12c361000 / 8 = 629 588 480 bytes is maybe the right value.
My question is: did you do something with your buffers? such as changing their
class in storage.conf, renaming them, etc.?
I for instance see:
gallifrey% ls -la /var/news/spool/articles
total 42890234
drwxr-xr-x 2 news news 1024 Dec 29 2008 .
drwxr-xr-x 9 news news 512 Feb 23 2009 ..
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071619072 Oct 26 12:45 four
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 156663808 Oct 26 11:44 foura
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071922176 Oct 26 12:40 fourb
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 2035830784 Oct 26 12:45 fourc
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071995904 Oct 26 12:45 one
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071975424 Oct 26 12:45 onea
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071963136 Oct 26 12:45 oneb
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 2162085888 Oct 26 12:45 onec
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 2342486016 Oct 26 12:37 three
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071975424 Oct 26 12:45 threea
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071922176 Oct 26 12:44 threeb
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 63131648 Oct 26 12:15 threec
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071975424 Oct 26 12:45 two
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071995904 Oct 26 12:45 twoa
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071991808 Oct 26 12:45 twob
-rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 3071922176 Oct 26 12:45 twoc
Why don't these CNFS buffers their right size of 3GB?
(For instance "three" or "threec".)
Did you remove and recreate them?
--
Julien ÉLIE
« Inter pradendum sit saepe parumque bibendum. »
More information about the inn-workers
mailing list