On Sat, 9 Aug 2014, Philip Guenther wrote:
[...]
Is there any explanation for the two additional links in the reference
count? Should I be worried that I've lost two subdirectories somehow?
Maybe? It could have been a bogus duplicated increment from some bug and
everything is fine, or it could have been a missing chain of other writes
and you lost stuff. Without knowing exactly what bug you hit it's
impossible to say. There have been ffs fixes since 5.3 that might be
involved, so you should certainly upgrade from that old (ahem, no longer
supported) release.
Thanks for your response.
More likely (and hopefully) it is the former, as I fsck'd the drive about
a month or two ago and no errors were reported. I don't miss any new data
since then. Thus the missing chain of other writes seems unlikely. Since
the previous fsck, I didn't remove any files or subdirectories and the use
of that filesystem for writing was very light. Unless I was copying new
data to that filesystem, it was mounted as read-only, but most of the time
the disk was off.
(To my surprise) I was able to compare the subdirectories with my backups.
It is highly improbable that I would have lost any of the subdirectories.
As for the slightly older release, I am in the process of sorting and
moving the data, an upgrade will follow.
Regards,
David
