georgetg Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Running unRaid version 4.7 Had a disabled disk due to a loose power cord when moving between cities which led to a missing drive then a blue icon. I proceeded to follow instructions and reset config and that drive came back. However, disk1 showed un-formatted as the MBR got set to 64 instead of 63. Fixed that by using unraid_partition_disk.sh -p after a few tense moments. The drive now shows up in unraid. When I ran initconfig and parity was checked it had a number of errors. I assume the errors were the result of the missing disk. Moreover, I noticed a couple of videos I have won't play through VLC (maybe 1 out of 50). However, since the drive has come back online my syslog is full of the following: "Aug 12 00:22:48 Olympus kernel: REISERFS warning: reiserfs-5090 is_tree_node: node level 0 does not match to the expected one 1 (Minor Issues) Aug 12 00:22:48 Olympus kernel: REISERFS error (device md1): vs-5150 search_by_key: invalid format found in block 255852545. Fsck? (Errors)" When I ran a reiserfsck --check /dev/md1 with the following results: Will read-only check consistency of the filesystem on /dev/md1 Will put log info to 'stdout' Do you want to run this program?[N/Yes] (note need to type Yes if you do):Yes ########### reiserfsck --check started at Sun Aug 12 00:12:29 2012 ########### Filesystem seems mounted read-only. Skipping journal replay. Zero bit found in on-disk bitmap after the last valid bit. Checking internal tree.. \/ 1 (of 17|/ 10 (of 93\/ 13 (of 170|block 84115457: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (84115457), whole subtree is / 19 (of 93// 99 (of 170| block 119668737: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (119668737), whole subtree is/ 24 (of 93// 34 (of 121\ block 12517377: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (12517377), whole subtree is / 39 (of 93\/139 (of 170- block 95092737: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (95092737), whole subtree is / 44 (of 93\/ 39 (of 170- block 347471873: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (347471873), whole subtree is/ 61 (of 93\/145 (of 170| block 73072641: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (73072641), whole subtree is/ 74 (of 93//160 (of 170/b lock 273088513: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (273088513), whole subtree is/ 91 (of 93-/ 14 (of 170| block 238256129: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (238256129), who/ 2 (of 17\/ 24 (of 121//133 (of 170- block 176357377: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (176357377), whole subtree is/ 25 (of 121\/ 19 (of 170- block 176422913: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (176422913), whole subtree is/ 26 (of 121\/ 20 (of 170\ block 181731329: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (181731329), whole subtree is/ 27 (of 121|/ 12 (of 170| block 182386689: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (182386689), whole subtree is/ 28 (of 121// 19 (of 170| block 182583297: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (182583297), whole subtree is/ 29 (of 121// 26 (of 170\ block 182779905: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (182779905), whole subtree is/ 30 (of 121|/ 2 (of 170- block 182943745: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (182943745), whole subtree is/ 31 (of 121\/ 3 (of 170- block 183468033: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (183468033), whole subtree is/ 32 (of 121\/ 22 (of 165/ block 194019329: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (194019329), whole subtree is/ 33 (of 121-/ 14 (of 168| block 194183169: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected Thoughts on a course of action? Link to comment
georgetg Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 I would throw a syslog up but it was 1.2 GB last attempt to d/l it Link to comment
dgaschk Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Was there any more output from reiserfsck? The end is missing. zip the syslog. Link to comment
georgetg Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 Rerunning the chk now. Link to comment
georgetg Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 Syslog attached (I had shut it down earlier so I don't see similar errors in the syslog). However, I reran reiserfsk but copy to clipboard didn't grab everything. It's a lot of: "the problem in the internal node occured (323125249), whole subtree is skipped / 81 (of 144|/ 33 (of 170/block 323321857: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected " similar to what was above. I've copied the ending output below: the problem in the internal node occured (129990657), whole subtree is skipped / 57 (of 94|/ 35 (of 170\block 246022145: The level of the node (0) is not correct, (1) expected the problem in the internal node occured (246022145), whole subtree is skipped finished Comparing bitmaps..vpf-10640: The on-disk and the correct bitmaps differs. Bad nodes were found, Semantic pass skipped 415 found corruptions can be fixed only when running with --rebuild-tree ########### reiserfsck finished at Sun Aug 12 01:42:26 2012 ########### syslog-2012-08-12.zip Link to comment
georgetg Posted August 12, 2012 Author Share Posted August 12, 2012 After reading that a -rebuild-tree was the next course of action I proceed with it. Drive used to show 76 GB free and now shows 1.3TB free (of 1.5TB drive). Files that showed they were there with the corruption are gone with the corruption fixed. Lost+found has about 200GB in it but no idea about the rest. Most files in lost found are useless. Ideas? Or the data toast Link to comment
Joe L. Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 After reading that a -rebuild-tree was the next course of action I proceed with it. Drive used to show 76 GB free and now shows 1.3TB free (of 1.5TB drive). Files that showed they were there with the corruption are gone with the corruption fixed. Lost+found has about 200GB in it but no idea about the rest. Most files in lost found are useless. Ideas? Or the data toast Only idea is to repeat the--rebuild-tree with the -S option. (to scan the entire disk) Joe L. Link to comment
georgetg Posted August 14, 2012 Author Share Posted August 14, 2012 Need some advice. After using -S and a data recovery software I think I got off as much as I could. Any flaws in what I plan on going forward that anyone can identify: 1) Remove the disk 2) Run initconfig to reset config based on array less the missing disk and rebuild parity to bring the array back online 3) Set 4k Aligned and preclear the disk a few times and if all good reinsert the disk into the array (I don't think the disk is bad) Thanks! Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.