Skip to main content

linux - Huge directory, not files inside, but directory itself




I have been trying to delete a directory from a centos server using rm -Rf /root/FFDC for the past 15 hours and am having great difficulty. I can't do a directory listing because it hangs the system (too many files?) but what I can see is that the directory size is not the usual 4096 bytes but 488MB!



[root@IS-11034 ~]# ls -al
total 11760008
drwxr-x--- 31 root root 4096 Aug 10 18:28 .
drwxr-xr-x 25 root root 4096 Aug 10 16:50 ..
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 488701952 Aug 11 12:20 FFDC



I've checked the inodes and everything seems fine. I've checked top and rm is still using the cpu after 15 hours at 0.7%. Filesystem type is ext3.



I'm clueless where to go now apart from backup and format.


Answer



Is even ls -1f /root/FFDC slow? With -1f the output won't be sorted and the file details will be left out.



If the ls above runs fast, perhaps something like find /root/FFDC | xargs rm -vf would be faster? A normal rm -rf might do all kind of recursion which the findMIGHT be able to skip. Or then not.



Is your filesystem mounted with sync option? If it is, then the write/delete performance is horribly slower than it could be with async. If in doubt, you might try mount -o remount,async / (or mount -o remount,async /root if that's a separate filesystem for you).


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able