BackupPC-users
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: [BackupPC-users] Disk space used far higher than reported pool size

2013-10-31 13:36:20
Subject: Re: [BackupPC-users] Disk space used far higher than reported pool size
From: "Craig O'Brien" <cobrien AT fishman DOT com>
To: "General list for user discussion, questions and support" <backuppc-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:33:30 -0400
> Just out of curiosity, why hadn't you already done that?!? 

I didn't know which host was the problem and didn't think of it. Although I'll readily admit it seems painfully obvious to me now. :)

>The big question is, though, why they aren't linking.  I'd really start at the bottom of the stack (the physical drives) and work your way up.  Check dmesg for any hardware errors.  


bash-4.1$ grep -i backup /var/log/dmesg*
bash-4.1$

bash-4.1$ grep -i backup /var/log/messages*
messages-20131006:Sep 30 13:53:24 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump[15365]: segfault at a80 ip 000000310f695002 sp 00007fff438c9770 error 4 in libperl.so[310f600000+162000]
messages-20131006:Sep 30 13:53:27 servername abrtd: Package 'BackupPC' isn't signed with proper key
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:24:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:24:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000001     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:30:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:30:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000001     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:32:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:32:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000001     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:32:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_nightl:18390 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:32:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_nigh D 0000000000000001     0 18390   1262 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:48:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:48:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000003     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:52:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:52:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000001     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:52:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_nightl:18390 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:52:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_nigh D 0000000000000001     0 18390   1262 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:56:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 01:56:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000003     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 02:10:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 02:10:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000001     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131020:Oct 19 02:12:54 servername kernel: INFO: task BackupPC_dump:11922 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
messages-20131020:Oct 19 02:12:54 servername kernel: BackupPC_dump D 0000000000000001     0 11922  10626 0x00000080
messages-20131027:Oct 23 09:00:02 servername abrtd: Package 'BackupPC' isn't signed with proper key


> fsck the filesystem. 

bash-4.1$ fsck /dev/sda1
fsck from util-linux-ng 2.17.2
e2fsck 1.41.12 (17-May-2010)
/dev/sda1: clean, 20074506/2929688576 files, 2775975889/2929686016 blocks
bash-4.1$

>Did I read correctly that this is connected vis NFSv4?  I sure hope not...  (I'm willing to admit it's a phobia, but there's no *WAY* I would trust my backup to work across NFS...) 

The drives are local SATA ones that I set up in a raid 5, directly mounted. Def not NFS. I had an unrelated drive mounted via NFS, but that had nothing to do with my backup system and that's probably the source of confusion.

So the du command finished, here's the result:

bash-4.1$ du -hs /backup/pool /backup/cpool /backup/pc/fileserver/*
4.0K    /backup/pool
2.8T    /backup/cpool
350M    /backup/pc/fileserver/223
361M    /backup/pc/fileserver/250
373M    /backup/pc/fileserver/278
325M    /backup/pc/fileserver/302
329M    /backup/pc/fileserver/331
330M    /backup/pc/fileserver/360
335M    /backup/pc/fileserver/388
338M    /backup/pc/fileserver/417
345M    /backup/pc/fileserver/446
346M    /backup/pc/fileserver/475
350M    /backup/pc/fileserver/503
450M    /backup/pc/fileserver/524
437M    /backup/pc/fileserver/525
437M    /backup/pc/fileserver/526
437M    /backup/pc/fileserver/527
2.5G    /backup/pc/fileserver/528
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/529
438M    /backup/pc/fileserver/530
467M    /backup/pc/fileserver/531
438M    /backup/pc/fileserver/532
438M    /backup/pc/fileserver/533
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/534
438M    /backup/pc/fileserver/535
1013M   /backup/pc/fileserver/536
442M    /backup/pc/fileserver/537
441M    /backup/pc/fileserver/538
441M    /backup/pc/fileserver/539
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/540
441M    /backup/pc/fileserver/541
442M    /backup/pc/fileserver/542
442M    /backup/pc/fileserver/543
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/544
442M    /backup/pc/fileserver/545
441M    /backup/pc/fileserver/546
442M    /backup/pc/fileserver/547
442M    /backup/pc/fileserver/548
1.3T    /backup/pc/fileserver/549
8.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/backups
8.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/backups.old
0       /backup/pc/fileserver/LOCK
8.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.012013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.022013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.032013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.042013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.052013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.062013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.072013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.082013.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.092013.z
12K     /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.102013
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.112012.z
8.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/LOG.122012.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/RestoreInfo.0
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/RestoreInfo.1
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/RestoreLOG.0.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/RestoreLOG.1.z
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/restores
4.0K    /backup/pc/fileserver/restores.old
15M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.223.z
19M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.250.z
16M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.278.z
14M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.302.z
14M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.331.z
14M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.360.z
15M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.388.z
15M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.417.z
15M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.446.z
15M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.475.z
15M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.503.z
3.7M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.524.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.525.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.526.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.527.z
18M     /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.528.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.529.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.530.z
1.2M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.531.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.532.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.533.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.534.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.535.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.536.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.537.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.538.z
1.4M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.539.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.540.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.541.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.542.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.543.z
1.5M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.544.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.545.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.546.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.547.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.548.z
1.3M    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.549.z
400K    /backup/pc/fileserver/XferLOG.bad.z.old
bash-4.1$

Some more info on the interesting ones:
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/529   (Incremental, level 1) (Error log contains thousands of "Unable to read 16384 bytes")
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/534   (Incremental, level 1) (Error log contains hundreds of "Unable to read 1507328 bytes")
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/540   (Incremental, level 2) (Error log contains hundreds of "Unable to read 1507328 bytes") 
1.4T    /backup/pc/fileserver/544   (incremental, level 1) (Error log contains hundreds of "Unable to read 1507328 bytes")
1.3T    /backup/pc/fileserver/549   (incremental, level 1) (this one doesn't have any of those errors.)

Just in case it's helpful, the fileserver's config file looks like this:

bash-4.1$ cat /etc/BackupPC/pc/fileserver.pl
$Conf{RsyncShareName} = ['fileshare', 'servershare'];
$Conf{RsyncdPasswd} = '';    #Edited to remove detail
$Conf{XferMethod} = 'rsyncd';
$Conf{IncrKeepCnt} = 25;
$Conf{FullKeepCnt} = [
  12
];
$Conf{FullPeriod} = 30;
$Conf{IncrLevels} = [
  1,
  2,
  3,
  4,
  5
];
$Conf{IncrPeriod} = 1;

I don't suppose this helps give any insight to what happened? Thanks for all your help!

Regards,
Craig


On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Marcel Meckel
<mailinglist+backuppc-users AT foobar0815 DOT de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Example:
>>         ls -l /var/lib
>>         lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root    root     22 Apr 22  2013 BackupPC ->
>> /data/BackupPC/TopDir/
>>
>>         mount
>>         /dev/sda1 on /data type ext4 (rw)
>
> out of curiosity - why don't you just configure /data/BackupPC/TopDir
> in config.pl as the TopDir?

Versions earlier than 3.2 didn't allow that after the initial install
- and in distribution-packaged version (rpm/deb) the location decision
had already been made by the packagers.

--
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: [BackupPC-users] Disk space used far higher than reported pool size, Les Mikesell
Next by Date:  Re: [BackupPC-users] Disk space used far higher than reported pool size, Sharuzzaman Ahmat Raslan
Previous by Thread:  Re: [BackupPC-users] Disk space used far higher than reported pool size, Les Mikesell
Next by Thread:  Re: [BackupPC-users] Disk space used far higher than reported pool size, Sharuzzaman Ahmat Raslan
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]