[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080521112224.GD5028@ucw.cz>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 13:22:25 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] (RESEND) ext3[34] barrier changes
Hi!
> >
> > Here's a test workload that corrupts ext3 50% of the time on power fail
> > testing for me. The machine in this test is my poor dell desktop (3ghz,
> > dual core, 2GB of ram), and the power controller is me walking over and
> > ripping the plug out the back.
>
> Here's a new version that still gets about corruptions 50% of the time, but
> does it with fewer files by using longer file names (240 chars instead of 160
> chars).
>
> I tested this one with a larger FS (40GB instead of 2GB) and larger log (128MB
> instead of 32MB). barrier-test -s 32 -p 1500 was still able to get a 50%
> corruption rate on the larger FS.
Ok, Andrew, is this enough to get barrier patch applied and stop
corrupting data in default config, or do you want some more testing?
I guess 20% benchmark regression is bad, but seldom and impossible to
debug data corruption is worse...
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists