- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 08:35 AM
01-27-2005 08:35 AM
file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
$ ana/disk/norepair or
$ mc dfu verify dsa3:
shows numerous files created today with
dsa3:
This site has all the critical patches (fibre scsi, rms, f11x, sys, lan...). The only patches missing are Eco 5 for Tcpip 5.1 (no eco at all) , Eco 6 for Decnet Osi and update V2 (but as all other patches are applied; I think it is not relevant). No device error since the 60 days of uptime on both nodes. Any idea what may be causing that ? The directory where many files are created has been re-created today, and files with no valid file header came quickly after. I noticed that the disk dsa3 has highwater marking and will try to convince my customer to remove it.
Thanks for any hint
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 10:05 AM
01-27-2005 10:05 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 05:56 PM
01-27-2005 05:56 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
It works but is not in help.
Wim
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 06:09 PM
01-27-2005 06:09 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
the new /LOCK_VOLUME qualifier is described in the V7.3-1 New Features manual.
Volker.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 06:32 PM
01-27-2005 06:32 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Very well but on my 7.3 ir is already understood. Even on my 6.2 ....
But I would advise not to use it on active production disks.
Wim
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 08:25 PM
01-27-2005 08:25 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 08:30 PM
01-27-2005 08:30 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
"directory where many files are created has been re-created today" - how did you do this?
highwater marking is unlikely to be relevant - depends on your security requirement v. the overhead
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 08:38 PM
01-27-2005 08:38 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
ana/disk/norepair dsa3:
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-27-2005 08:57 PM
01-27-2005 08:57 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-28-2005 03:28 AM
01-28-2005 03:28 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
highwater file marking doesn't matter (as mentioned in a previous reply).
Is it possible to remove one member of the shadow set and analyze it without any activity?
I only had once the problem with file corruption, it was caused by a defective controller. The defect was a very vicious one, he wasn't even detected by the onboard diag utilities. And more worse - being in a shadow set, half the reads were correct.
Analyze/disk to a heavily used disk, even with /lock, isn't very advisable.
If nothing else is possible, try to get a maintenance window.
Convince your customer, that a potential corruption of his data can get more worser the longer he waits.
Another question: Has your customer got the magic "too many files in a directory, can't delete them, so I kill the directory a non-VMS-way with some of these nice tools" problem?
Regards
Andreas
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-28-2005 05:01 AM
01-28-2005 05:01 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-28-2005 08:28 AM
01-28-2005 08:28 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
If you investigate I'm sure you will find that the files mentioned in the BADDIRENT, BAD_FIDSEQ, and BAD_DIRFIDSEQ messags were being created and/or deleted while you were running ANAL/DISK. You might also get them for old files if the system crashed, etc. while those files were being created or deleted, but /REPAIR will fix those.
Likewise the errors ALLOCCLR, or its cousins ALLOCSET and DUALLOC, will occur on an active volume. I'm not sure about the ALLOCEXT message but it might also be normal when multitple file headers are involved.
Tbe DELHEADER message is normal even with the disk locked if a file has been marked for delete on close but is still open by an application.
On the other hand I'm not sure why you would get the BADNAMEFORM or BADHEADER messages unless those particular file headers were corrupted.
Bottom line: ANAL/DISK without /REPAIR or DFU VERIFY without /FIX (or /LOCK) are both pretty useless for detecting file corruption on a volume with file activity.
I've always wondered if it would be possible to first scan the volume without /LOCKing it, make a list of *potential* problems, and then do a quick lock/check/unlock for each problem in the list.
This approach wouldn't work for ALLOCCLR errors since you would have to rescan the entire index file to confirm the problem, but ALLOCLCR is just lost space, not real corruption anyway.
However it should allow a real quick check (in terms of how long the volume is locked) for whether ALLOCSET, DUALLOC, BADDIRENT, BAD_FIDSEQ and some other errors detected during an unlocked pass were real errors or not.
I realize this approach would give some false negatives since a real problem with the storage bitmap can, on an active volume, migrate between various files and from being detected as ALLOCSET or as DUALLOC. Still this option would be an extremely valuable tool for detecting real disk corruption without locking large active volumes for several minutes - which is the only option available now
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-30-2005 11:44 PM
01-30-2005 11:44 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
probabbly a long shot but it may be of use.
A customer has reported severe file corruption in SAN, and investigation by HP (including DFU's author!) revealed a bug in DFU as defragmenter: in rare cases, bits in the bitmap were marked as free where the blocks were actually allocated to files. (it seems, as has been explained, that a bit set states a block MAY be allocated to a file, and DFU made the wrong assumption sometimes).
This has surely been fixed but I'm not sure if this new version is already available. I'm quite certain it will appear on the next freeware CD.
OpenVMS Developer & System Manager
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-30-2005 11:54 PM
01-30-2005 11:54 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Wim
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-31-2005 12:11 AM
01-31-2005 12:11 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-31-2005 12:31 AM
01-31-2005 12:31 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Willem: DFU (V 2.7) has only been used here by me with dfu verify, so this is not an issue. Thanks for the information.
Fassl: the directory are not so big, the biggest is 7 000 blocks, and a good number are between 500 and 3 000 blocks (which is very bad, but I have already seen much worse).
Goodman: it seems you are right, the files shown by ana/disk/norepair today were created today...
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-31-2005 11:55 PM
01-31-2005 11:55 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
I have noticed using
VERIFY/DIRECTORY_SCAN/LOCK
gives the most meaningful results but takes the longest to do. The author of DFU allows you the choice of tradoff. /NODIR is the default.
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-01-2005 12:21 AM
02-01-2005 12:21 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Tahnsk for the info Ian
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-01-2005 05:26 AM
02-01-2005 05:26 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-01-2005 06:07 AM
02-01-2005 06:07 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
http://filext.com/detaillist.php?extdetail=CWK
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-01-2005 07:53 AM
02-01-2005 07:53 AM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-01-2005 08:25 PM
02-01-2005 08:25 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-03-2005 06:51 PM
02-03-2005 06:51 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
$ ana/disk/norepair with no activity on the disk.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-03-2005 08:53 PM
02-03-2005 08:53 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
You appear to have lots of lost files and disk space which suggests a directory or two was lost as well as some improperly deleted files.
Purely Personal Opinion
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-03-2005 09:03 PM
02-03-2005 09:03 PM
Re: file corruption with Vms 7.2-2
I wouldn't like to be the one that has to tell management that a corruption was caused by usage of freeware ...
Well, without starting a war, what is the difference when there is a big bug in a big company product ( Microsoft, HP, Digital, Sun, Ibm, Oracle...), and a big bug in a freeware ?
You use some software, and there is some risk using it. You can prove that a program is bug-free only when it is a very simple program (100 lines or so). When you have 10 000 or 100 000 or more lines of code, you can't be sure. Of course it is convenient to have somebody to blame
:-)