Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-20 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 00:11 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Setup new 60G home partition on laptop as a real life test of 0.16. > Using Ubuntu standard kernel 2.6.24-19-generic on i386 > > I notice that during normal (busy time) everything seems fine, but after > going away > for a while and co

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-16 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 09:19 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:25:14 -0400 > Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 00:11 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Setup new 60G home partition on laptop as a real life test of 0.16. > > > Using Ubuntu s

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:21:22 -0400 Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 11:06 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > So, the question is why the kernel compile workload works for me. What > > > kind of hardware are you running (ram, cpu, disks?) > > > > Intel(R) Core(

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 11:06 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > So, the question is why the kernel compile workload works for me. What > > kind of hardware are you running (ram, cpu, disks?) > > Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7700 @ 2.40GHz > Memory 2G > Disk 80G (partition was 20G) > It see

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:26:00 -0400 Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 09:19 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:25:14 -0400 > > Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 00:11 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > S

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 09:19 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:25:14 -0400 > Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 00:11 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Setup new 60G home partition on laptop as a real life test of 0.16. > > > Using Ubuntu s

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:25:14 -0400 Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 00:11 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Setup new 60G home partition on laptop as a real life test of 0.16. > > Using Ubuntu standard kernel 2.6.24-19-generic on i386 > > > > Thanks for giving thi

Re: btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Chris Mason
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 00:11 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Setup new 60G home partition on laptop as a real life test of 0.16. > Using Ubuntu standard kernel 2.6.24-19-generic on i386 > Thanks for giving things a try > I notice that during normal (busy time) everything seems fine, but after

btrfs day 1

2008-08-14 Thread Stephen Hemminger
Setup new 60G home partition on laptop as a real life test of 0.16. Using Ubuntu standard kernel 2.6.24-19-generic on i386 I notice that during normal (busy time) everything seems fine, but after going away for a while and coming back, it seems sluggish. Lots of errors in log: btrfs csum failed