SUMMARY: Q: what to do with "log half full" panic

From: Niels Kokholm <kokholm_at_math.ku.dk>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 10:10:29 +0100 (MET)

I got replies from

Bevan Broun <bevanb_at_ee.uwa.edu.au>
"Fliguer, Miguel" <M_Fliguer_at_unifon.com.ar>
"Aviles Aviles, Mario" <Mario.Aviles_at_sonda.com>
Steve Hancock <shancock_at_zk3.dec.com>
Claudio Tantignone <C_Tantignone_at_sondaarg.com.ar>
Richard Jackson <rjackson_at_portal.gmu.edu>

Most recommended (with detailed instructions how) to increase the
advfs log size with the undocumented -l argument to
/sbin/advfs/switchlog. This implies adding an extra disk (perhaps only
temporarily) to the advfs domain.

My local Compaq Support Repr. showed me how to find the name of the
offending domain using kdbx on the crash dump. Then I managed to get
hold of two unused SBB disks and room in the storage works
shelves. Using storageworks command console i built a RAID 1 set (re3)
on those disks (while the system was up in multiuser mode). I added
re3c to the problematic advfs domain and switched logs to re3c:
 /sbin/advfs/switchlog -l 2048 export 2
Then I crossed my fingers and ran defragment on the domain without
problems.

Two supplementary questions:

1) After having built the new RAID set, and having built and installed
- but not rebooted - a new kernel with the additional line

device disk re3 at xcr0 drive 3

I added the re3 devices with MAKEDEV, and tried to add the volume re3c
to the advfs domain. I expected that I would have to reboot the new
kernel before I could use re3, but the volume was added and used
without complaints. What am I missing?

2) Now a complete vdump of the domain (to a TZ87) takes 6 hours as
opposed to 7.5 hours before adding the disk. Before I had 1Gb out of
16 Gb free now 3 Gb out of 18Gb free. In the mean time I also doubled
RAM from 256Mb to 512 Mb.

Should I attribute this speedup to adding the disk or to the extra memory?
Does 6 hours sound reasonable to you?

Yours,

   Niels Joergen Kokholm | email: kokholm_at_math.ku.dk
   Institut for Matematiske Fag | phone: +45 3532 0759/+45 2128 6932
   Universitetsparken 5 | fax: +45 3532 0704
   DK-2100 Kobenhavn OE, Denmark | www: http://www.math.ku.dk/~kokholm

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, Niels Kokholm wrote:

>
> Yesterday we had the experience of a panic of our Alphaserver 1000A
> running DU4.0d with jumbo patch 3 (the latest Advfs patch installed seems
> to be Patch 0392.01 - AdvFS Consolidated Patch).
>
> /var/adm/messages says
>
> Mar 19 15:08:53 abel vmunix: ADVFS EXCEPTION
> Mar 19 15:08:54 abel vmunix: Module = ms_logger.c, Line = 2005
> Mar 19 15:08:54 abel vmunix: release_dirty_pg: log half full
> Mar 19 15:08:54 abel vmunix: panic (cpu 0): release_dirty_pg: log half
> full
>
> dia also simply reports the "release_dirty_pg: log half full".
>
> According to /var/adm/crash/crash-data.0 defragment was running at the
> time of the crash (started at 4:00). There is a core file in / from kdbx,
> which seems to have had a segmentation fault while running at boot after
> the crash.
>
> At least some of the advfs filesystems on the box were created January
> 1996, probably under du 3.2c. Most filesystems have little free space. The
> volumes are on a SWX RAID controller (230).
>
> I would like your advice on the following:
> Due to the tight disk space we are going to install a RA3000 instead
> of the swxcr230 within a few weeks. In the course of this all the advfs
> domains will, of course, be recreated.
> 1) Should I panic now myself, stop the server, recreate the filesystems
> on the existing volumes and restore from tape. Or should I just stop
> running defragment for the next few weeks and hope nothing else triggers
> the "log half full" panic before the new disksystems are installed?
> 2) Any newer patches I should install ASAP?
> 3) Should it be possible from the crash data to find out which file
> domain was the reason for the crash?
> 4) (This has not much todo with the crash) On the RA3000 I plan to use a
> 2x4Gb disks in a RAID 1 set for system disk and 5x18Gb in a RAID 5 set for
> user files to be exported via NFS and Samba. At the outset the RAID 5
> set would be one big advfs domain split into a couple of filesets.
> Would it be beneficial for (write) performance on the user files to use
> some of the space on the RAID 1 set for the Advfs log file?
>
> Yours
>
>
> Niels Joergen Kokholm | email: kokholm_at_math.ku.dk
> Institut for Matematiske Fag | phone: +45 3532 0759/+45 2128 6932
> Universitetsparken 5 | fax: +45 3532 0704
> DK-2100 Kobenhavn OE, Denmark | www: http://www.math.ku.dk/~kokholm
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Mar 22 2000 - 09:11:37 NZST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed Nov 08 2023 - 11:53:40 NZDT