Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
James Pearson wrote: - [fs] xfs: backport to rhel5.4 kernel (Eric Sandeen ) [470845] - [fs] xfs: update to 2.6.28.6 codebase (Eric Sandeen ) [470845] Eric Sandeen is ex-SGI and I guess the experienced XFS engineer mentioned ... No, Eric is doing ext4 (and has been for quite some while now). Ralph pgpAcB9FYFKkm.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
Ralph Angenendt wrote: James Pearson wrote: - [fs] xfs: backport to rhel5.4 kernel (Eric Sandeen ) [470845] - [fs] xfs: update to 2.6.28.6 codebase (Eric Sandeen ) [470845] Eric Sandeen is ex-SGI and I guess the experienced XFS engineer mentioned ... No, Eric is doing ext4 (and has been for quite some while now). That doesn't stop him from being an 'experienced XFS engineer' :-) James Pearson ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
xfs kmod's for centos-5 have so far been done within the centos loop, but this is interesting - looks like 5.4 might have a tech-preview for xfs included in. FWIW, at FOSDEM 2009 Ted T'so said that he anticipated official XFS support from Redhat in the near future as they recently hired some experienced XFS engineers. It was not an official announcement of any kind, he was just speculating during a presentation on ext4. It's all just speculation until we see the goods, of course. -geoff - Geoff Galitz Blankenheim NRW, Germany http://www.galitz.org/ http://german-way.com/blog/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
Geoff Galitz wrote: FWIW, at FOSDEM 2009 Ted T'so said that he anticipated official XFS support from Redhat in the near future as they recently hired some experienced XFS engineers. It was not an official announcement of any kind, he was just speculating during a presentation on ext4. It's all just speculation until we see the goods, of course. I think it is more than speculation - xfs support has already gone into 5.4 pre-release kernels at http://people.redhat.com/dzickus/el5/ - the change log includes: - [fs] xfs: backport to rhel5.4 kernel (Eric Sandeen ) [470845] - [fs] xfs: update to 2.6.28.6 codebase (Eric Sandeen ) [470845] Eric Sandeen is ex-SGI and I guess the experienced XFS engineer mentioned ... James Pearson ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 07:34:13AM -0700, Akemi Yagi wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: Joseph L. Casale wrote: I never thought of that given that they come from the plus repo. So its only iirc, the xfs kmod's are not kernel ver dependant anymore, and havent been for a while. Tru / Akemi ? The kABI-tracking kmod-xfs for CentOS-5 started in Oct 2008. The CentOS-4 version has been tested and will be offered shortly (as soon as you/Tru builds it for release). :-D But the code is somewhat getting old. Maybe it's time to get the project xfs going again? Tru is the leader of this project. OLD? What is broken that needs fixing? XFS is in rather good shape and should not require much activity. As technology goes it was cutting edge technology when SGI designed it. It may be that ext4 will catch up but based on the clock the new ext4 may not be as stable as XFS is. A year from now... who knows. I do see xfs related patches going to Linus today ... so it is not idle. -- T o m M i t c h e l l Found me a new hat, now what? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS (fwd)
Doesn't look like my reply hit the list for some reason. -- James A. Peltier Systems Analyst (FASNet), VIVARIUM Technical Director Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 778-782-6573 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpelt...@sfu.ca Website : http://www.fas.sfu.ca | http://vivarium.cs.sfu.ca http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier MSN : subatomic_s...@hotmail.com The point of the HPC scheduler is to keep everyone equally unhappy. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:35:20 -0700 (PDT) From: James A. Peltier jpelt...@cs.sfu.ca To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org Subject: Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Ross Walker wrote: I think it's worth while to keep xfs updated for a while until ext4 has made enough of an in-road to say xfs should be depreciated in favor of ext4. -Ross Considering that it still takes several minutes to format a partition with EXT4 vs the couple of seconds for XFS, I don't see XFS depricated *any* time soon. -- James A. Peltier Systems Analyst (FASNet), VIVARIUM Technical Director Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 778-782-6573 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpelt...@sfu.ca Website : http://www.fas.sfu.ca | http://vivarium.cs.sfu.ca http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier MSN : subatomic_s...@hotmail.com The point of the HPC scheduler is to keep everyone equally unhappy. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS (fwd)
On Apr 17, 2009, at 5:01 PM, James A. Peltier jpelt...@fas.sfu.ca wrote: On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Ross Walker wrote: I think it's worth while to keep xfs updated for a while until ext4 has made enough of an in-road to say xfs should be depreciated in favor of ext4. -Ross Considering that it still takes several minutes to format a partition with EXT4 vs the couple of seconds for XFS, I don't see XFS depricated *any* time soon. Time to format isn't really an issue as it is done once before being put into production. The biggest concern is processing performance and time to fsck as well as data integrity and recoverability. Besides XFS allocates inodes on the fly, that's why it's so fast formatting, but why ext4 is a little faster processing. -Ross ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS (fwd)
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Ross Walker wrote: Time to format isn't really an issue as it is done once before being put into production. The biggest concern is processing performance and time to fsck as well as data integrity and recoverability. Listen, when you're talking a multi TB or PB file system it *is* an issue I assure you. With disk sizes growing like they are it is only going to get worse. This is a concern for a great many of us. Besides XFS allocates inodes on the fly, that's why it's so fast formatting, but why ext4 is a little faster processing. EXT4 is in a few edge cases faster due to this, but XFS is still very fast in almost all other scenarios despite this. -- James A. Peltier Systems Analyst (FASNet), VIVARIUM Technical Director Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus Phone : 778-782-6573 Fax : 778-782-3045 E-Mail : jpelt...@sfu.ca Website : http://www.fas.sfu.ca | http://vivarium.cs.sfu.ca http://blogs.sfu.ca/people/jpeltier MSN : subatomic_s...@hotmail.com The point of the HPC scheduler is to keep everyone equally unhappy. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
Joseph L. Casale wrote: I never thought of that given that they come from the plus repo. So its only a matter of time then before it appears for the 5.3 kernels... If I have time this weekend, I'll yank an srpm down from the 5.2 branch kmod and see what's involved in making this (Never done it, so I have no idea off the top of my head). iirc, the xfs kmod's are not kernel ver dependant anymore, and havent been for a while. Tru / Akemi ? - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: Joseph L. Casale wrote: I never thought of that given that they come from the plus repo. So its only a matter of time then before it appears for the 5.3 kernels... If I have time this weekend, I'll yank an srpm down from the 5.2 branch kmod and see what's involved in making this (Never done it, so I have no idea off the top of my head). iirc, the xfs kmod's are not kernel ver dependant anymore, and havent been for a while. Tru / Akemi ? The kABI-tracking kmod-xfs for CentOS-5 started in Oct 2008. The CentOS-4 version has been tested and will be offered shortly (as soon as you/Tru builds it for release). :-D But the code is somewhat getting old. Maybe it's time to get the project xfs going again? Tru is the leader of this project. Akemi ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote: Joseph L. Casale wrote: I never thought of that given that they come from the plus repo. So its only a matter of time then before it appears for the 5.3 kernels... If I have time this weekend, I'll yank an srpm down from the 5.2 branch kmod and see what's involved in making this (Never done it, so I have no idea off the top of my head). iirc, the xfs kmod's are not kernel ver dependant anymore, and havent been for a while. Tru / Akemi ? The kABI-tracking kmod-xfs for CentOS-5 started in Oct 2008. The CentOS-4 version has been tested and will be offered shortly (as soon as you/Tru builds it for release). :-D But the code is somewhat getting old. Maybe it's time to get the project xfs going again? Tru is the leader of this project. I think it's worth while to keep xfs updated for a while until ext4 has made enough of an in-road to say xfs should be depreciated in favor of ext4. -Ross ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
Looking at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469401 has me a bit unsure about the kmod for 5.3's kernel, is not expected to appear? Thanks! jlc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
On 04/15/2009 08:58 PM, Joseph L. Casale wrote: Looking at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469401 has me a bit unsure about the kmod for 5.3's kernel, is not expected to appear? xfs kmod's for centos-5 have so far been done within the centos loop, but this is interesting - looks like 5.4 might have a tech-preview for xfs included in. -- Karanbir Singh : http://www.karan.org/ : 2522...@icq ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS
xfs kmod's for centos-5 have so far been done within the centos loop, but this is interesting - looks like 5.4 might have a tech-preview for xfs included in. I never thought of that given that they come from the plus repo. So its only a matter of time then before it appears for the 5.3 kernels... If I have time this weekend, I'll yank an srpm down from the 5.2 branch kmod and see what's involved in making this (Never done it, so I have no idea off the top of my head). When 5.4 comes out, I might end up using ext4 anyway :) Thanks for the info. jlc ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
