[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEUQceh8oX9TsOR-rtn44QtegGSGH_+QHm9GPcoVPqHGJMhWHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 08:12:14 +0530
From: Subranshu Patel <spatel.ml@...il.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fsck memory usage
> What version of e2fsprogs are you using? There has been a number of
> changes made to improve both CPU and memory utilization in more recent
> versions of e2fsprogs.
I am using version 1.41.12
>> Then I performed metadata corruption - 10% of the files, 10% of the
>> directories and some superblock attributes using debugfs. Then I
>> executed fsck to find a memory usage of around 8GB, a much larger
>> value.
> It's going to depend on what sort of metadata corruption was suffered.
> If you need to do pass 1b/c/d fix ups, it will need more memory.
> That's pretty much unavoidable, but it's also not the common case. In
> most use cases, if those cases require using swap, that's generally OK
> if it's the rare case, and not the common case. That's why it's not
> something I've really been worried about.
I used the sar command for tracking memory usage. The total memory
usage reported by sar command is around 8GB, but it includes the
buffer and cache memory.
memused = 8GB
buffer = 6.7GB
cache = negligible (some MBs)
So I think the effective memory usage will be 1.3GB (8 - 6.7). So the
memory reported under buffer and cache is available for use (if any
other process requires it). Please correct my understanding.
--
Subranshu
--
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