Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!scott From: scott@stl.stc.co.uk (Mike Scott) Newsgroups: comp.os.vms Subject: Re: Repairing disks with corrupted index files Message-ID: <625@acer.stl.stc.co.uk> Date: 2 Feb 88 11:33:20 GMT References: <2471@trlsasb.oz> <880109071621.025@CitHex.Caltech.Edu> <613@acer.stl.stc.co.uk> <3968@blia.BLI.COM> Reply-To: scott@stl.stc.co.uk (Mike Scott) Organization: STL,Harlow,UK. Lines: 32 In article <3968@blia.BLI.COM> ted@blia.BLI.COM (Ted Marshall) writes: >In article <613@acer.stl.stc.co.uk>, scott@stl.stc.co.uk (Mike Scott) writes: >> We've also had some nasty problems with a supereagle and QD32 controller (on a ....... >> files apparently entered in two directories, one correctly, one wrongly. The >> symptoms were consistent with the bad block replacement algorithm failing by ....... >One point on your seeing files in two directories. The backup of this disk >was made on a semi-live system (i.e. I was on, doing work that created files). >When that was restored to the new disk and the system brought up, I noticed >that while all of the directory entries for those files existed, several of >the files themselves didn't. In addition, some of the other directory entries >where linked to files that other people had created since the restore! It ....... >The bottom line is that the double-entry files you saw may not have had >anything to do with failures of bad-block replacement. I'm afraid I was rather misleading in my article. Certainly, the restored disk had the problems I noted. But I know that at least one of the files was afftected before I did the backup/reformat/restore. It was one of mine, and was why I realised we had a major problem! It was only after the restore that I carried out a post-mortem. I haven't noticed any problems doing backups on live systems, but we very rarely need to do a restore, so wouldn't notice probably :-( -- Regards. Mike Scott (scott@stl.stc.co.uk ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!scott) phone +44-279-29531 xtn 3133.