Re: [CentOS] 5.3 and XFS

2009-05-14 Thread Ralph Angenendt
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

2009-05-14 Thread James Pearson
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

2009-05-13 Thread Geoff Galitz



 
 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

2009-05-13 Thread James Pearson
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

2009-04-30 Thread Nifty Cluster Mitch
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)

2009-04-17 Thread James A. Peltier
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)

2009-04-17 Thread Ross Walker
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)

2009-04-17 Thread James A. Peltier
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

2009-04-16 Thread Karanbir Singh
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

2009-04-16 Thread Akemi Yagi
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

2009-04-16 Thread Ross Walker
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

2009-04-15 Thread Joseph L. Casale
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

2009-04-15 Thread Karanbir Singh
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

2009-04-15 Thread Joseph L. Casale
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