Re: slow rebuild-tree
Hello, On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:48:01 -0300 Cesar Augusto Bonadio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Is this normal to take this long? any ideas? Yes, i think so, especially if you have many files and that the partition begins to be more full than empty ( say 50%) I used to operate some SCSI RAID5 disks attached to a megaraid controller and the ~600Go partition could take 24hours to 48hours to fsck. In the meantime you can strace the process and see that it's still running # strace -p 19047 Good luck, Truly yours, Philippe
Re: A Word of Warning about Linux Software Raid
Hello Justin, On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 07:20:32 -0400 (EDT) Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | There is no parity with raid0, so there should be nothing to check? Yes i forgot that my RAID1 is done in hardware, and that RAID0 is actually done is software (yes funny setup, i know :) Thanks, Philippe
Re: A Word of Warning about Linux Software Raid
Hello, On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 21:34:50 +0200 Adrian Ulrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | It seems that the kernel does not check the integrity of the data on mirrored raid, | | It does if you tell the kernel to do so: | | # echo check /sys/block/md0/md/sync_action I have just upgraded from an older kernel to be able to use such a functionality but : boogie:~# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid5] [raid4] [raid6] [multipath] md0 : active raid0 sde1[0] sdk1[6] sdj1[5] sdi1[4] sdh1[3] sdg1[2] sdf1[1] 501773440 blocks 64k chunks unused devices: none boogie:~# echo check /sys/block/md0/md/sync_action -bash: /sys/block/md0/md/sync_action: Permission denied boogie:~# mount | grep sys sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) What am i missing here ? Thanks, Philippe
Re: 2.6.18-rc3 - ReiserFS - warning: vs-8115: get_num_ver: not directory or indirect item
Hello Jesper, On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:39:07 +0200 Jesper Juhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | they don't seem to have caused any trouble/corruption here, so if you | haven't experienced any problems either I think I'll relax and just | wait for an explanation from some reiserfs folks. | | Thank you for replying - nice to know that I'm not the only one seeing | this and that it's not something that has caused massive troubles for | someone else. I reported such a message back in May 2004 ( kernel 2.6.6-rc3 ), to which Vladimir replied : On Thu, 06 May 2004 14:43:22 +0400 Vladimir Saveliev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I guess that warning became obsolete when Oleg [EMAIL PROTECTED] | added possibility to insert long indirect items. Then Hans asked for that warning to be removed, and i guess it must have slipped through the TODO list :) Thanks, Philippe
Re: 2.6.16-rc6-mm2: slow writes on reiser4.
Hello Laurent, On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 08:16:55 +0200 Laurent Riffard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So I found more conclusive to write 150M and thus to fill up the 2 FS. Thanks for the explanations. Truly yours, Philippe
Re: 2.6.16-rc6-mm2: slow writes on reiser4.
Hello Laurent, On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 22:19:01 +0200 Laurent Riffard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | These FS are quite similars. Now guess what ? I filled these FS with | dd. | | Original FS | === | # sync | # time dd if=/dev/zero of=toto bs=1M count=150 | 103+0 enregistrements lus. | 102+0 enregistrements écrits. | Command exited with non-zero status 1 Well, at least on my system , such a command exits with a 0 status Also, not a single of your posts in this thread has this error except this one and the one below | 0.00user 2.94system 3:32.18elapsed 1%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata | 0maxresident)k | # time sync | 0inputs+0outputs (0major+279minor)pagefaults 0swaps | 0.00user 0.01system 0:00.18elapsed 6%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata | 0maxresident)k | 0inputs+0outputs (0major+191minor)pagefaults 0swaps | | Copy FS | === | # sync | # time dd if=/dev/zero of=toto bs=1M count=150 | dd: écriture de `toto': Aucun espace disponible sur le périphérique | 132+0 enregistrements lus. | 131+0 enregistrements écrits. | Command exited with non-zero status 1 Here, i can understand the exited with non-zero status 1 as Aucun espace disponible sur le périphérique is french for No space left on device | 0.00user 4.08system 0:15.95elapsed 25%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata | 0maxresident)k | 0inputs+0outputs (1major+279minor)pagefaults 0swaps | # time sync | 0.00user 0.00system 0:00.17elapsed 0%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata | 0maxresident)k | 0inputs+0outputs (0major+190minor)pagefaults 0swaps | disk$ | | See ? 3'30 versus 16. Are the 16 due to the fact that the above command exited earlier than it should have ? Thanks, Philippe
Re: Linux Gazette benchmark Reiser 4
Hello, On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 13:41:50 +0100 Andrea Gelmini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | 2006/1/6, Robert Hulme [EMAIL PROTECTED]: | | http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszcz | | It seems to come off fairly badly in most of the tests. | | | I really did not understand this kind of benchmark. I don't care which | filesystem is faster creating 10.000 files (something I never have to do). I | care about which filesystem fits better with my everyday use of my data. Well, i do care about which filesystem is faster creating 10.000 files : I happened recently to author a DVD under Linux using mplayer. For creating some menus, i had to (well mplayer had to) dump an mpeg file into jpegs , creating about 6000 pictures ( 4 titles with about 1500 pictures for each) (and deleting them afterwards of course) I do expect Reiser4 to be faster in the long run for such operations (large creates/deletes) even if that's not the case right now. I'm rather disappointed by the feeling this benchmark will give the average users : Reiser4 is either dog slow or far for being ready for prime time. Still, as Hans said, i think that some valuable things can be learnt from this benchmark and it will be good if this benchmark could be carefully reproduced by Namesys and other Reiserfs enthusiasts Thanks, philippe
Re: need opinions from sysadmins on where reiser4progs should install
Hello, On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100 rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | When I run make install on something and haven't specified a prefix on | configure, I expect /usr/local to be used. If I wanted /, I'd have | specified that on configure time. If it installed in / by default, it | would, often, hit the sacred package-system managed area of the VFS | tree annoying people like me to a very great extend, so please don't. While i totally agree with you for standard packages, well i based my choice on actual experience of the last past six years of use with reiserfs V3. I can't remember how many times i heard Namesys team say Install the latest greatest reiserfsck, how many times distro thought they knew reiserfsprogs internals better than Namesys and customized it to the point where it would eventually break. Of course, i can live with a manual install of reiser(fs|4)progs, so i don't really mind, but talking of support, it can make quite a difference to Namesys in terms of support, and annoyance with bug reports that could have been easily avoided. Final decision will still be Namesys call, but hopefully this whole thread gave them some valuable input to make the best decision. Thanks, Philippe
Re: need opinions from sysadmins on where reiser4progs should install
Hello Hans, On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:17:37 -0800 Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What do the sysadmins on the list think? | | Hans Personally, for Reiserfs V3, i always compiled reiserfsprogs statically and installed the tools in /sbin. Mainly because, we used to have /usr on a separate partition on all server installs. So should a crash occur and /usr becomes corrupted, well, at least / is mounted and i could reiserfsck partitions right away, handy when the server is several thousand kilometers away :) I expect to do the same for reiser4progs, so i wish that reiser4progs utilities would install in /, and as such /sbin seems the best choice _to me_ Thanks Philippe PS: I hope that Santa will bring me a brand new kernel.org kernel with reiser4 in :) Good luck with that, and congratulations to you and the whole team for such a nice filesystem
Re: error compiling reiser4 for kernel 2.6.13.1
Hello Vladimir, On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:12:06 +0400 Vladimir V. Saveliev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Please try more recent version of reiser4 for 2.6.13: | ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4-for-2.6/2.6.13/reiser4-for-2.6.13-4.patch.gz Well, i've been away for quite some time and didn't follow reiser4 development closely enough so i'd like to know if this patch contains everything needed, kernel wise ? No other kernel patch needed ? Thanks, Philippe
Re: online fsck
Hello, On Tue, 24 May 2005 22:02:20 -0500 btinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | What i'm looking for is a check on a reiserfs filesystem that is | mounted read-write. Many modern filesystems, especially those on NAS | devices, can run periodic background consistency checks on filesystems | with almost zero impact on performance. Some devices are reportedly | running these checks constantly, possibly correcting errors without | user intervention... even a notification to a sysadmin would be a good | feature. Last time i asked Hans about the possibility to have a --rebuild-tree (for reiserfs) while the fs is online and mounted rw, he told me to send 30.000 US Dollars in, and that it could eventually be done ;) Sure lots of people would find this a killer feature, but someone will definitely have to pay get such a feature implemented. Thanks, Philippe
Re: ReiserFS 2.4 patches need few fixes
Hello, Could you try these patches instead ( don't know if 2.4.25 data-logging patches apply cleanly to 2.4.29 though) ? ftp://ftp.suse.com:/pub/people/mason/patches/data-logging/2.4.25 Thanks, Philippe On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:46:36 +0100 Bostjan Skufca @ domenca.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | there are 3 fuzz warnings and one reject when applying patches from | ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfs-for-2.4/data-logging-2.4.24 | to vanilla 2.4.29 kernel. | | | Here is the patch output (irelevant output is omitted): | ...
Reiser4: Interactive Data Structure Visualization : B+ tree java applet
Hello, I came upon this nice java applet that lets you play with a B+ tree data structure. http://www.cs.msstate.edu/~cs2314/global/BTreeAnimation/visualization.html Thanks, Philippe Ref: http://www.namesys.com/v4/v4.html#cache_design
Re: Quotas aand 2.5.x
Hi Hans, On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:06:40 +0300 Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Philippe, am I right in guessing that you don't need it urgently? If | so, I will let Chris do it, and it might take just a bit longer. Actually, right now, we still have that nasty bug every time we run quotacheck that prenvent us from enabling them on several filerservers which is a big problem right now (that's on 2.4.x) As i thought that now most of efforts are put into 2.5.x, i might be able to take advantage of all the new functionnalities but what i do need is Reiserfs + NFS + quota. On the NFS part , there have been so many enhancements in 2.5.x (and on other parts as well) that i'm really eager to give it a try. Could Chris tell me then how much time does he think it will take to have quota in 2.5.x. I think it would be best for everybody to wait for Chris to implement quotas in 2.5.x so that people at Namesys can focus on Reiserfs v4 :o) What do you think ? Thanks, Philippe
Re: Quotas aand 2.5.x
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:46:29 +0300 Oleg Drokin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hello! | | On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 10:43:06AM +0100, Philippe Gramoull? wrote: | | Actually, right now, we still have that nasty bug every time we run quotacheck that prenvent us from enabling them on several filerservers which is a big problem right now (that's on 2.4.x) | | Have you tried 2.4. without Chris' datalogging patched, but with original short | overflow fix? Well, my question was more like a Plan B. I think i did, and that it still crashed, always during the quotacheck, but i'll try it again to be 100% sure. Thanks, Philippe
Re: Quotas aand 2.5.x
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:03:36 +0300 Oleg Drokin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The 2.4.19-presomething you had there before with just only fix I sent first | time? hmm, not the 2.4.19-presomething IIRC, it was a later kernel. I'll retry with the 2.4.19pre6 and come back to you. Thx, Philippe
Re: [reiserfs-list] Oops with in nfsd - 2.4.19-pre6
FYI, This in the log , before the oops : journal-1413: journal_mark_dirty: j_len (1024) is too big and filer is low on space :o) /dev/sdb1572418604 572341220 77384 100% /storage Should it be because filer hit 0 on space ? Thanks, philippe On Tue, 29 Oct 2002 18:14:38 +0300 Oleg Drokin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hello! | | On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:59:07PM +0100, Philippe Gramoull? wrote: | | Is this still the infamous NFSD/inode race ? | | No. | This is a bug in journalling code. | Something related to improper transaction blocks accounting. | Chris said he will try take care of it and rejected my | simple, but invalid patch. | | Chris, any news on that? | | EIP; c0194899 reiserfs_panic+29/60 = | Trace; c01a1bcc journal_mark_dirty+160/320 | | Bye, | Oleg |
[reiserfs-list] Quota patches and kinoded versions
Hi Chris, I need to rebuild an up-to-date 2.4 quota aware kernel for Reiserfs 3.6 and i see this difference between what i run now ( 2.4.19-pre6) and the files on your FTP servers: Since march 2002 ( timestamps of my files) , it was kinoded-8-2.4.19-pre3 and i see that kinoded-8-2.4.19-pre7 is of Sept 2002. Other files didn't change. We have some regular oopses on servers which act as fileservers ( ReiserFS+NFS) and i wonder whether i should upgrade regarding this. Also, do you plan to sync quota patches with 2.4.20pre or with 2.4.20 final once its out ? Thanks, Philippe.
Re: [reiserfs-list] [OT] memory issue with GNU find
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:54:47 +0200 Fabien Combernous [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Do you have test tree ? Yes we have couple ones, which are actual old producation data. So tests would be pretty accurate, to what we would have in production. Philippe
Re: [reiserfs-list] [OT] memory issue with GNU find
On 24 Oct 2002 11:54:45 -0400 Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | Exactly how are you running the find? Like this: find /path-to-list -type f ! -user root Philippe
[reiserfs-list] [OT] memory issue with GNU find
Hi, Sorry to be a little off topic here but here is the issue: For legal reasons we need to list all files on a filer (reiserfs FS so not _that_ offtopic :o). Problem is that the filer is about 400Go and number of files according to /proc/fs/reiserfs/*/oidmap is about 20 Million files. From what we've read and seen , find is eating up all memory to the point that the filer start to swap and then crashes. Would anyone know how to do that without bring the filer to its knees in terms of memory ? thanks, Philippe
Re: [reiserfs-list] Reiserfs with Samba vs NetApp Filer
Hi, On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 09:48:34 +0800 darren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Hi all, | | I was just wondering if I should spend $$ (my company's of cos) on a | NetApp filer... | | OR | | I just get one of the Dell 3650 doing nothing in the corner with RAID5 | and run Samba as a fileserver? | | Anyone got any benchmarks to compare the two? | | Is NetApp as good as its advertised? We switched from NetApp to DELL ( PowerVault 210S ) mainly because of the $$ :o) NetApp are really good but really expensive as well.So it depend how much value you give to your data. Netapp as well have tons of features that linux boxes +PV210S can't do :Clustering volume copy, out out the box snapshots,etc.. | | Any comments on this setup is welcomed Now i think DELL realease their 220S with 14 disks in a shelf so that would have the bang for your bucks. On the otherside, NetApp comes with a very nice , proprietary , OS that's quite simple to use. So best price/performance = DELL If you have unvaluable data = NetApp (+ backup :o) | | Regards | Darren | Philippe.
Re: [reiserfs-list] Reiserfs with Samba vs NetApp Filer
Hi, Yes, that's what i meant by not *out of the box* snapshots. We quite never played with LVM as it adds another software layer and i didn't feel it was mature enough at the time we put everything in production but given the benefits we might want to give it a try. BTW, Hans, what you would recommand : LVM or EVMS ? Thanks, Philippe On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 21:31:29 +0400 Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Netapp as well have tons of features that linux boxes +PV210S can't do :Clustering | volume copy, out out the box snapshots,etc.. | | Linux has snapshots if you use lvm, but it is true that Netapp makes a | good product.
Re: [reiserfs-list] Permission denied !? - will i ever update my system again ? [Slightly OT]
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 13:06:26 +0400 Vitaly Fertman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | Hm. So you have duplicate oid issue most probably, reiserfsck | --rebuild-tree will cure that. Be sure to update to latest reiserfsprogs | | --fix-fixable will cure about that also. | BTW, would there be a noticeable difference in term of time it takes between --fix-fixable and --rebuild-tree ? (partition is ~600Go full at 65%, _lots_ of dir and files, very nested) Thanks, Philippe.
Re: [reiserfs-list] Quota support for UID 65534
On 16 Jul 2002 10:14:08 +0200 Zeljko Brajdic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Following Honza recommandations , we simply stripped out the if (id ~0x) line by hand and we now use quota ith 32bits UIDs without any problem :o) It's not a bug , more likely a test that's been there for long at the time of 32bit UIDs were not ready , it think. Thanks, Philippe. | We have found error. :) In fs/dquot.c at line 2057 exists if | statement: | | if (id ~0x) | goto out; | | Is this feature or bug?! :) This have been found in vanilla kernel-2.4.18 | -- | v, v v | Zeljko Brajdic - Zorz | |
Re: [reiserfs-list] [PATCH CFT] tons of logging patches + addon
Hi, On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 17:21:33 +0200 Manuel Krause [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Have you ever considered to use lm_sensors? | You need the latest kernel patch (2.6.4 CVS). | | I've tried it some months ago. After collecting all the needed things | and compiling over it didn't say more than my thermometer, IIRC one | veryfiably correct temperature value :-( | Then I tried to get this info from a program within Win98 and didn't | succeed, either. The first longer moment to think about cheap hardware... | | But maybe I should give it a new try ?! If you're using DELL PowerEdge and given the model version , you may be out of luck. From dell ML : | lmsensors doesn't work with many PowerEdge servers, including the PE2400. | Instead we recommend using Dell OpenManage Server Administrator. | | Thanks, | Matt | | -- | Matt Domsch | Sr. Software Engineer | Dell Linux Solutions www.dell.com/linux Thanks, Philippe.
Re: [reiserfs-list] [PATCH] write barriers for 2.4.x
Chris Mason wrote: On Thursday, February 14, 2002 02:18:40 AM +0100 Philippe Gramoullé [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Chris Mason wrote: ... If you really want to experiment with this on scsi, but have a different adapter, let me know. ... I'd be very much interested to see how it behaves with the PERC3/QC from DELL (megaraid driver) Hmmm, the megaraid driver seems to use scsi tags, but not support any of the ordered ones. I'll have to drop a message to the maintainer to see if this is possible. -chris Hi Chris, Great ! Let me know when you have some news on this issue. Thanks, Philippe.
Re: [reiserfs-list] reiserfs quota patches for 2.4.17
Chris Mason wrote: The suse ftp server mirror hasn't picked them up yet. I think it updates every 3 hours, but it seems to have been faster recently. Well, it looks that it has been updated :o) They aren't large, I can forward privately if needed. Thank you very much. This is not needed anymore now that the files are available. I'll try this out ASAP and bug report as usual if we find something wrong. -chris Philippe.
[reiserfs-list] mkreiserfs segfaults with 3.x.0k-pre13
Hi Vladimir, My setup : 4x 12 disks x72Go RAID 5 on a RAID PERC3/QC Partition size is about 1.7 To mkreiserfs segfaults when i try to make the partition. I can reproduce it every time. Here is the gdb trace: (gdb) set args --hash r5 --format 3.6 /dev/sdd1 (gdb) run Starting program: /usr/src/reiserfsprogs-3.x.0k-pre13/mkreiserfs/./mkreiserfs --hash r5 --format 3.6 /dev/sdd1 -mkreiserfs, 2001- reiserfsprogs 3.x.0k-pre13 Format 3.6 with standard journal Count of blocks on the device: 4187425469 Number of blocks consumed by mkreiserfs formatting process: 70466 Blocksize: 4096 Hash function used to sort names: r5 Journal Size 8193 blocks Journal Max transaction length 1024 ATTENTION: YOU SHOULD REBOOT AFTER FDISK! ALL DATA WILL BE LOST ON '/dev/sdd1'! Continue (y/n):y Initializing journal - 0%20%40%60%80%100% Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. find_buffer (dev=7, block=-107541828, size=4096) at io.c:274 274 next = tmp-b_hash_next; (gdb) bt #0 find_buffer (dev=7, block=-107541828, size=4096) at io.c:274 #1 0x0804ab01 in getblk (dev=7, block=-107541828, size=4096) at io.c:350 #2 0x0804acc6 in bread (dev=7, block=4187425468, size=4096) at io.c:439 #3 0x0805e17c in reiserfs_flush_to_ondisk_bitmap (bm=0x806c0a0, fs=0x806bfb8) at bitmap.c:276#4 0x0805ea17 in reiserfs_close_ondisk_bitmap (fs=0x806bfb8) at bitmap.c:667#5 0x0805c344 in reiserfs_close (fs=0x806bfb8) at reiserfslib.c:357#6 0x0804a4d6 in main (argc=6, argv=0xb6b4) at mkreiserfs.c:685#7 0x4003565f in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6(gdb) full backtrace: (gdb) bt full #0 find_buffer (dev=7, block=-107541828, size=4096) at io.c:274 dev = 7 block = -107541828 size = 4096 next = (struct buffer_head *) 0x20736e61 #1 0x0804ab01 in getblk (dev=7, block=-107541828, size=4096) at io.c:350 dev = 7 size = 4096 bh = (struct buffer_head *) 0xb7f6 #2 0x0804acc6 in bread (dev=7, block=4187425468, size=4096) at io.c:439 block = 4187425468 bh = (struct buffer_head *) 0xf9970abc #3 0x0805e17c in reiserfs_flush_to_ondisk_bitmap (bm=0x806c0a0, fs=0x806bfb8) at bitmap.c:276to_copy = 0 copied = 0 i = 0 p = 0x8 Address 0x8 out of bounds last_byte_unused_bits = 134660024 block = 134609447 bh = (struct buffer_head *) 0xb5ac #4 0x0805ea17 in reiserfs_close_ondisk_bitmap (fs=0x806bfb8) at bitmap.c:667fs = (reiserfs_filsys_t *) 0x806bfb8 #5 0x0805c344 in reiserfs_close (fs=0x806bfb8) at reiserfslib.c:357 fs = (reiserfs_filsys_t *) 0x806bfb8 #6 0x0804a4d6 in main (argc=6, argv=0xb6b4) at mkreiserfs.c:685 fs = (reiserfs_filsys_t *) 0x806bfb8 force = 0 device_name = 0xb7f6 /dev/sdd1 jdevice_name = 0x0 fs_size = 4187425469 c = -1348 flag = 0 #7 0x4003565f in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 No symbol table info available. (gdb) The fact is that it dosn't happen with 3.x.0j: root@bigass:/usr/src/reiserfsprogs-3.x.0j/mkreiserfs# date; ./mkreiserfs -h r5 -v 2 /dev/sdd1; date Fri Dec 14 03:47:16 CET 2001 -mkreiserfs, 2001- reiserfsprogs 3.x.0j === LEAF NODE (8211) contains level=1, nr_items=2, free_space=3932 rdkey - --|###|type|ilen|f/sp| loc|fmt|fsck| key || |||e/cn|| |need| | ---| 0|1 2 0x0 SD, len 44, entry count 0, fsck need 0, format new| (NEW SD), mode drwxr-xr-x, size 48, nlink 2, mtime 12/14/2001 03:47:16 blocks 8 ---| 1|1 2 0x1 DIR, len 48, entry count 2, fsck need 0, format old| ###: Name lengthObject key Hash Gen number 0: .( 1) 1 2 01, loc 40, state 4 ?? 1: .. ( 2) 0 1 02, loc 32, state 4 ??=== Creating reiserfs of 3.6 format Block size 4096 bytes Block count 429329084 Used blocks 21314 Free blocks count 429307770 First 16 blocks skipped Super block is in 16 Bitmap blocks (13103) are : 17, 32768, 65536, 98304, 131072,..lots of numbers here 428933120, 428965888, 428998656, 429031424, 429064192, 429096960, 429129728, 429162496, 429195264, 429228032, 429260800, 429293568, 429326336 Journal size 8192 (blocks 18-8210 of file /dev/sdd1) Root block 8211 Hash function r5 ATTENTION: YOU SHOULD REBOOT AFTER FDISK! (y/n) ALL DATA WILL BE LOST ON '/dev/sdd1'! y Initializing journal -
Re: [reiserfs-list] Viability of Open Source Business Models Tried Once Again:-)
On Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:58:47 +0300 Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | Everyone prefers that someone else pay for performance effective data | journaling support. Hi Hans, Any idea of hwo much it would cost to do so and how much time it would take ? It would make lot of sense here. Could you answer the same questions as above for implementing zero copy. Thanks, Philippe
Re: [reiserfs-list] Re: [REISERFS TESTING] new patches on ftp.namesys.com: 2.4.15-pre7
Hi Just a follow up to Dieter's figures (2.4.15-pre8 + [A-M] patches) 2550 controller RAID 5 PowerVault 210S , PERC3/QC 161J Firmware. 50s for ./dbench 32 to complete. # date;./dbench 32;date Wed Nov 21 18:07:34 CET 2001 ...32 clients started ..++..! .+..+.++...+...+..+..+...+.++...+..+++..+.+.+.. Throughput 87.3891 MB/sec (NB=109.236 MB/sec 873.891 MBit/sec) 32 procs Wed Nov 21 18:08:24 CET 2001 This is the best bench we had so far :o) Thanks, Philippe. dbench/dbench time ./dbench 32 32 clients started .! ..+++...+++...++....++....++..++.++ Throughput 43.2101 MB/sec (NB=54.0126 MB/sec 432.101 MBit/sec) 13.880u 51.700s 1:38.77 66.3% 0+0k 0+0io 937pf+0w Dbench 32 is 10 seconds and nearly 3 MB/sec faster then all kernels I've tried before. Thanks Andrea, Linus and the whole ReiserFS team. -Dieter
[reiserfs-list] Quotas / Production Quality
Hi, On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 18:54:12 -0400 Chris Mason wrote: Hello everyone, This is beta code, it is working here, but should not be used on production machines. We tried the new quota format with lots of process doing reads , writes (at the same time : ltp , dbench 32, kernel compilation , and quotacheck -vfumM -F vfsv0 /dev/blah) on a testbed system here. No single problem at all. :o) So we are extremely pleased with either the functionality of the new quotas as well with its speed. My question is : is so *beta* code that i can cause corruptions or problems on a production server ? oops ? When can we expect a go for it ? Thanks you very much. Philippe.
[reiserfs-list] Trace file available
Hi, Maybe Nikita will be the one most interested by this file. the trace file is available at : http://reiserfs.multimania.com/trace-sdc1.bz2 It's taken from a 8Go partition ( 4Go used , snapshot from some production data) Philippe.
