[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110520112018.GB3867@belkar.wrar.name>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:20:18 +0600
From: Andrey Rahmatullin <wrar@...linux.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Bruno Prémont <bonbons@...ux-vserver.org>,
xfs-masters@....sgi.com, xfs@....sgi.com,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Alex Elder <aelder@....com>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.39-rc3, 2.6.39-rc4: XFS lockup - regression since 2.6.38
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:19:29AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > x4 ~ # xfs_info /
> > meta-data=/dev/root isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=1949824 blks
> > = sectsz=512 attr=2
> > data = bsize=4096 blocks=7799296, imaxpct=25
> > = sunit=128 swidth=128 blks
> > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0
> > log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=3808, version=2
> > = sectsz=512 sunit=8 blks, lazy-count=1
> > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
> OK, so the common elements here appears to be root filesystems
> with small log sizes, which means they are tail pushing all the
> time metadata operations are in progress.
Does that mean that such filesystems are not optimal in terms of
performance and/or reliability and should have larger log sizes?
--
WBR, wRAR
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists