On Fri, 2013-01-11 at 00:42 +0100, Thilo Six wrote: [...] > >> [ 7.844458] audit: name_count maxed, losing inode data: dev=00:06, inode=5738 > >> [ 7.844462] audit: name_count maxed, losing inode data: dev=00:06, inode=5625 > >> [ 7.844466] audit: name_count maxed, losing inode data: dev=00:06, inode=5743 > >> [ 7.844470] audit: name_count maxed, losing inode data: dev=00:06, inode=5743 > > > > That's pretty frequent --- I don't think this much log noise is > > acceptable. Any idea how high name_count is when it happens? > > No. Speaking openly i do not know what it is telling me at all. But reading > "losing inode data" got my attention so to say. [...] This doesn't mean that anything has been damaged in the filesystem. It only means that some system call touched so many inodes that they couldn't all be recorded for auditing purposes. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings If you seem to know what you are doing, you'll be given more to do.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part