Re: kworker threads may be working saner now instead of using 100% of a CPU core for minutes (Re: Still not production ready)

2016-09-07 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Am Mittwoch, 7. September 2016, 11:53:04 CEST schrieb Christian Rohmann: > On 03/20/2016 12:24 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > >> btrfs kworker thread uses up 100% of a Sandybridge core for minutes on > >> > >> > random write into big file > >> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90401

Re: kworker threads may be working saner now instead of using 100% of a CPU core for minutes (Re: Still not production ready)

2016-09-07 Thread Christian Rohmann
On 03/20/2016 12:24 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: >> btrfs kworker thread uses up 100% of a Sandybridge core for minutes on >> > random write into big file >> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90401 > I think I saw this up to kernel 4.3. I think I didn´t see this with 4.4 > anymore

kworker threads may be working saner now instead of using 100% of a CPU core for minutes (Re: Still not production ready)

2016-03-20 Thread Martin Steigerwald
On Sonntag, 13. Dezember 2015 23:35:08 CET Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Hi! > > For me it is still not production ready. Again I ran into: > > btrfs kworker thread uses up 100% of a Sandybridge core for minutes on > random write into big file > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/sho

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-16 Thread Chris Mason
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 06:30:58PM -0800, Liu Bo wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:19:00AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > >max_stripe_size is fixed at 1GB and the chunk size is stripe_size * > > >data_stripes, > > >may I know how your partition gets a 10GB chunk? > > > > Oh, it seems that I

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-15 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Am Dienstag, 15. Dezember 2015, 16:59:58 CET schrieb Chris Mason: > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:08:16AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: > > >Hi! > > > > > >For me it is still not production ready. > > > &

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-15 Thread Liu Bo
Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:08:16AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: > >>>>>Hi! > >>>>> > >>>>>For me it is still not production ready. > >&

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-15 Thread Chris Mason
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:08:16AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: > >Hi! > > > >For me it is still not production ready. > > Yes, this is the *FACT* and not everyone has a good reason to deny it. > >

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-15 Thread Qu Wenruo
Chris Mason wrote on 2015/12/15 16:59 -0500: On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:08:16AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: Hi! For me it is still not production ready. Yes, this is the *FACT* and not everyone has a good reason to deny it. Again I ran

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-15 Thread Qu Wenruo
not production ready. Yes, this is the *FACT* and not everyone has a good reason to deny it. Again I ran into: btrfs kworker thread uses up 100% of a Sandybridge core for minutes on random write into big file https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90401 Not sure about guideline for other fs

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-14 Thread Duncan
Qu Wenruo posted on Mon, 14 Dec 2015 15:32:02 +0800 as excerpted: > Oh, my poor English... :( Well, as I said, native English speakers commonly enough mis-negate... The real issue seems to be that English simply lacks proper support for the double-negatives feature that people keep wanting to

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-14 Thread Austin S. Hemmelgarn
On 2015-12-14 14:08, Chris Murphy wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: Qu Wenruo posted on Mon, 14 Dec 2015 15:32:02 +0800 as excerpted: Oh, my poor English... :( Well, as I said, native English speakers commonly enough mis-negate... The real issue

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-14 Thread Chris Murphy
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Qu Wenruo posted on Mon, 14 Dec 2015 15:32:02 +0800 as excerpted: > >> Oh, my poor English... :( > > Well, as I said, native English speakers commonly enough mis-negate... > > The real issue seems to be that English simply

still kworker at 100% cpu in all of device size allocated with chunks situations with write load (was: Re: Still not production ready)

2015-12-14 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Am Sonntag, 13. Dezember 2015, 15:19:14 CET schrieb Marc MERLIN: > On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 11:35:08PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > Hi! > > > > For me it is still not production ready. Again I ran into: > > > > btrfs kworker thread uses up 100%

still kworker at 100% cpu in all of device size allocated with chunks situations with write load (was: Re: Still not production ready)

2015-12-14 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Am Montag, 14. Dezember 2015, 10:08:16 CET schrieb Qu Wenruo: > Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: > > Hi! > > > > For me it is still not production ready. > > Yes, this is the *FACT* and not everyone has a good reason to deny it. > > > Agai

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-13 Thread Marc MERLIN
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 11:35:08PM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Hi! > > For me it is still not production ready. Again I ran into: > > btrfs kworker thread uses up 100% of a Sandybridge core for minutes on random > write into big file > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/

Still not production ready

2015-12-13 Thread Martin Steigerwald
Hi! For me it is still not production ready. Again I ran into: btrfs kworker thread uses up 100% of a Sandybridge core for minutes on random write into big file https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90401 No matter whether SLES 12 uses it as default for root, no matter whether Fujitsu

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-13 Thread Duncan
Qu Wenruo posted on Mon, 14 Dec 2015 10:08:16 +0800 as excerpted: > Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: >> Hi! >> >> For me it is still not production ready. > > Yes, this is the *FACT* and not everyone has a good reason to deny it. In the above

Re: Still not production ready

2015-12-13 Thread Qu Wenruo
Duncan wrote on 2015/12/14 06:21 +: Qu Wenruo posted on Mon, 14 Dec 2015 10:08:16 +0800 as excerpted: Martin Steigerwald wrote on 2015/12/13 23:35 +0100: Hi! For me it is still not production ready. Yes, this is the *FACT* and not everyone has a good reason to deny it. In the above