Re: ls reports incorrect file size compared to what debugfs reports for ext3 filesystem

[Matthew Woehlke]

James Youngman wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:33 AM, Matthew Woehlke
> <address@hidden> wrote:

Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.

> > Chris Weston wrote:
> > > I'm trying debug an issue with my one of my disks in my system. I
> > > have an ext3 file system mounted and ls -l is reporting an impossible
> > > size for two of the files: log_1848_1239927341.core and
> > > log_1848_1239927341.core~. The size is 98P. This partition
> > > (/dev/sdb2) is only a few GB in size.
> > Maybe the file is sparse? What does 'stat log_1848_1239927341.core' have to
> > say?
>
> Chris already posted that in this thread.     The file does appear to
> be sparse.

Ah, sorry. Missed it in all the strace noise ;-). So... except that my 
ext3 doesn't seem to allow files of 5T or larger, I'd say nothing is 
wrong here. (While I didn't see anything in mke2fs, I can't rule out an 
option when creating the FS to allow files of that size.)

> However, the strace output also looks very unusual ...
> [snip strace]
> .... which leads me to on the one hand wonder if the platform is MIPS,
> but on the other hand wonder if something else is going on, since the
> strace output seems to contain so many unknown errno values and the
> strace output doesn't seem to end with an exit syscall.

Strange indeed. Doesn't strace usually contain calls other than 
system()? :-) (It does here, anyway, but of course I am on 
garden-variety x86_64.)

--
Matthew
Use the --force, Luke -- Riccardo Iaconelli