[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: resize2fs on LVM2 on hardware RAID5

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 11:57:23AM +0100, Pim Bliek wrote:

> I said this after Pim said that...

>  at some point Pim said:

> ># resize2fs -f /dev/vg00/vartest
> >> resize2fs 1.40-WIP (14-Nov-2006)
> >> Filesystem at /dev/vg00/vartest is mounted on /vartest; on-line
> >> resizing required
> >> old desc_blocks = 1, new_desc_blocks = 1
> >> resize2fs: Kernel does not support online resizing
> >
> >I did some more poking
> >around. /usr/share/doc/e2fsprogs/REALEASE-NOTES.gz referes to debian
> >bug #380548. In there is mention of whether the filesystem was created
> >with the -O resize_inode option or not. Apparently this became default
> >in e2fsprogs 1.39. If you used a default mke2fs prior to that youmay
> >not have that option in the filesystem which may be causing the
> >problem. Looks like you might need to mirror the fs somewhere else
> >while you get it redone.
> >
> Hmm, so that means I am stuck... The system was installed from a 
> (modified
> for 3Ware card + LVM support) Sarge install CD which means 1.37 for
> e2fsprogs (I checked). So this means the -O option wasn't used...
> Damn.. this will mean I will have to recreate all filesystems on the 
> box...
> That's going to be some downtime somewhere...
> There is no alternative? No way to 'migrate' this fs to work with 
> resizing?

I don't think you can "migrate" it in the way you are describing
(somehow setting that option on the fly, right? man tune2fs says
nothing about it.). I would think you need to mirror the system
(assuming you have the diskspace) onto a properly setup fs and then
switch your operation over to that. Minimal downtime, if any. 

I strongly recommend that you seek more advice before proceeding. ANd
look into that -O option some more before committing to a course of
action. It might be worth an email to the maintainer as he is also (I
believe) upstream. He has been responsive in the past. Maybe he has
some advice for you. I only mention all this as I was the source of
information that is steering you down the road to taking down your
production system and I have *NO* experience with production
anything... you are warned all friendly-like :-).


ps, can you work on fixing the top-posting thing? I have fixed up this
message for us. thx.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: