Hi,
Is it not simpler to ask the reiserfs guys for a detailed explanation
of why and where this plugins' layer differs from using VFS for
plugins and let others comment on that ?
If something cant be done using VFS this layer is needed by reiser4
and has to be merged.
Michele
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 06:46:50PM +0200, M. wrote:
Is it not simpler to ask the reiserfs guys for a detailed explanation
of why and where this plugins' layer differs from using VFS for
plugins and let others comment on that ?
I hope this is not FUD or something like that, but it seems to me
the
Vladimir Saveliev writes:
Hello
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 18:28, Nikita Danilov wrote:
David Masover writes:
[...]
Maintainability is like optimization. The maintainability of a
non-working program is irrelevant. You'd be right if we already had
Artem B. Bityuckiy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus TÐrnqvist wrote:
So merge it as it is
Fix it first. The merge as it stands just gives rise to stuff that is
/never/ fixed properly.
and move the stuff to the VFS as needed or
deemed necessary. And enable the pseudo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Horst von Brand wrote:
Artem B. Bityuckiy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus TЖrnqvist wrote:
[...]
and move the stuff to the VFS as needed or
deemed necessary. And enable the pseudo interface, or at least
set it in menuconfig
David Masover writes:
[...]
What we want is to have programs that can write small changes to one
file or to many files, lump all those changes into a transaction, and
have the transaction either succeed or fail.
No existing file system guarantees such behavior. Even atomicity of
single
David Spotlight on the Mac. Users love it. We can do it. But
David not without changing something in the filesystem.
David Actually, I think we came up with several ways to do this,
David all of which required Reiser4 interfaces.
It seems the existing Beagle project is a
Correct me if I am wrong:
What exists currently in VFS are vector instances, not classes. Plugins,
selected by pluginids, are vector classes, with each pluginid selecting
a vector class. You propose to have the vector class layer (aka plugin
layer) in reiser4 export the vector instance to VFS for
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
What is wrong with having one file in the FS use a write only plugin, in
which the encrypion key is changed with every append in a forward but
not backward computable manner, and in order to read a file you must
either have a key that is stored on another computer
Hans Reiser wrote:
Christoph,
Reiser4 users love the plugin concept, and all audiences which have
listened to a presentation on plugins have been quite positive about
it. Many users think it is the best thing about reiser4. Can you
articulate why you are opposed to plugins in more detail?
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is wrong with having an encryption plugin implemented in this
manner? What is wrong with being able to have some files implemented
using a compression plugin, and others in the same filesystem not.
What is wrong with having one file in the FS
Andi Kleen wrote:
Christoph does a lot of reviewing
and he is notorious for making needed linux contributors go away and not
come back, and I won't say which famous person on this mailing list told
me that
and your child definitely
is in serious need of that to be mergeable. I'm sure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Hans Reiser wrote:
Christoph,
Reiser4 users love the plugin concept, and all audiences which have
listened to a presentation on plugins have been quite positive about
it. Many users think it is the best thing about reiser4.
First of all, I'm HW engineer, and don't know much about implementation
details of FS. I know some coding, I've coded for different levels from
linux device drivers to GUI's, but I know a lot about integration
between levels of hierarchy.
I generally agree with the idea that high level
David Masover wrote:
There's been sloppy code in the kernel before. I remember one bit in
particular which was commented Fuck me gently with a chainsaw. If I
remember correctly, this had all of the PCI ids and the names and
manufacturers of the corresponding devices -- in a data structure --
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 06:07:58PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
Christoph,
Reiser4 users love the plugin concept, and all audiences which have
listened to a presentation on plugins have been quite positive about
it. Many users think it is the best thing about reiser4. Can you
articulate why
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 11:25:24PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
You're basically implementing another VFS layer inside of reiser4, which
is a big layering violation.
There's been sloppy code in the kernel before. I remember one bit in
particular which was commented Fuck me gently with a
Hello
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 21:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What patch set did you apply? If this is the last one
(reiser4-for-2.6.11-5)
there is some inconsistency due to format changes
that will be fixed in the next release.
Yes, it was reiser4-for-2.6.11-5. Would this
Hello.
reiser4 patch for 2.6.12 is not ready yet.
All available reiser4 patches are in
ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4-for-2.6
Thanks,
Lena.
David Arendt wrote:
Hi,
I just wanted to know if there are currently patches for 2.6.12
available and if not when they will be approximately be
What patch set did you apply? If this is the last one (reiser4-for-2.6.11-5)
there is some inconsistency due to format changes
that will be fixed in the next release.
Yes, it was reiser4-for-2.6.11-5. Would this inconsistency cause fsck to
find problems that just didn't exist? Would fsck's
On Monday 06 June 2005 22:39, Adrian Ulrich wrote:
I upgraded to Linux 2.6.11.11 using the -5 reiser4 patch.
It fixed it.. somewhat.. it's still funky:
* mkisofs doesn't crash with the new kernel, yeah!
* after running mkisofs, grub can't read the filesystem anymore..
The
Hi Vitaly,
there was a format change to work with encryption plugin in
-5 reiser4 patch. progs do not have its support yet. grub works
through the progs code so its the same problem, mkisofs is not
relevant here.
I don't think thats the problem:
It looks like a remount bug:
See [EMAIL
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 15:01, Adrian Ulrich wrote:
Hi Vitaly,
there was a format change to work with encryption plugin in
-5 reiser4 patch. progs do not have its support yet. grub works
through the progs code so its the same problem, mkisofs is not
relevant here.
I don't think
I am about the particular fsck message that appeares when you
use -5 reiser4 patch:
Ok, but i think it's still strange:
This message only re-appears if i do a:
mount -o ro /dev/md1 /somewhere
mount -o remount,rw /dev/md1 /somewhere --- !!!
umount /dev/md1
fsck.reiser4 /dev/md1 --
On Tuesday 7 June 2005 15:10, Adrian Ulrich wrote:
Ok, but i think it's still strange:
This message only re-appears if i do a:
mount -o ro /dev/md1 /somewhere
mount -o remount,rw /dev/md1 /somewhere --- !!!
umount /dev/md1
fsck.reiser4 /dev/md1 -- fsck will complain..
What happens
Hello.
Do you have more than one mounted reiser4 partition?
Thanks,
Lena
Adrian Ulrich wrote:
Hi,
Well, i managed to crash reiser4 ;-)
I created an iso-image on my reiser4 filesystem (it's my rootfs)
using mkisofs. mkisofs aborted because the filesystem was full.
After freeing up some
On Sunday 05 June 2005 18:50, Adrian Ulrich wrote:
Hi,
Well, i managed to crash reiser4 ;-)
I created an iso-image on my reiser4 filesystem (it's my rootfs)
using mkisofs. mkisofs aborted because the filesystem was full.
After freeing up some space, i ran mkisofs again and: *bam*
Adrian Ulrich wrote:
Hi,
Well, i managed to crash reiser4 ;-)
I created an iso-image on my reiser4 filesystem (it's my rootfs)
using mkisofs. mkisofs aborted because the filesystem was full.
After freeing up some space, i ran mkisofs again and: *bam*
fsck.reiser4 told me to run
what reiser4 patch do you use for this kernel?
That should be
ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4-for-2.6/2.6.11/reiser4-for-2.6.11-4.patch.gz
I'll give -5 a try this evening
I upgraded to Linux 2.6.11.11 using the -5 reiser4 patch.
It fixed it.. somewhat.. it's still funky:
* mkisofs doesn't crash with the new kernel, yeah!
* after running mkisofs, grub can't read the filesystem anymore..
The filesystem got corrupted. (It was ok before i booted
into
Now the same thing happens again :-/
Ok, i know why it only got corrupted after using
the partition as rootfs :
My Reiser4 partition doesn't like to get remounted rw:
Running
1) mount /dev/md1 /somewhere
2) umount /dev/md1
3) mount -o ro /dev/md1 /somewhere
4) umount /dev/md1
works
On Tuesday 31 May 2005 22:42, Aaron Porter wrote:
I'm trying to create a reiser4 filesystem on a ~4tb block device,
but I'm getting the error Fatal: The partition size is too big. The FAQ
seems to list a max filesystem size of 16tb. Am I missing something?
diablo:~# mkreiser4
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 04:42:33PM +0400, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
would you try this patch for libaal-1.0.4?
mkreiser4 completes without errors now, but attempting to mount
the filesystem gives:
ReiserFS: sda3: warning: sh-2021: reiserfs_fill_super: can not find reiserfs on
sda3
ReiserFS: sda3: warning: sh-2021: reiserfs_fill_super: can not find
reiserfs on sda3
Ehrm, This sounds like Reiser3,
does your kernel support Reiser4? Maybe you should use modprobe?
--
We're working on it, slowly but surely...or not-so-surely in the spots
we're not so sure...
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 07:56:05PM +0200, Adrian Ulrich wrote:
ReiserFS: sda3: warning: sh-2021: reiserfs_fill_super: can not find
reiserfs on sda3
Ehrm, This sounds like Reiser3,
does your kernel support Reiser4? Maybe you should use modprobe?
You would be correct. I had
ADT wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm looking into using reiser4 and it's encryption plugin on a number
of new CentOS4 servers I will be building. I've been doing various
searches via google and the list archives, and I've seen a few emails
from last year which indicated that the encryption plugin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Edward Shishkin wrote:
ADT wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm looking into using reiser4 and it's encryption plugin on a number
of new CentOS4 servers I will be building. I've been doing various
searches via google and the list archives, and I've seen a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any suggestions for performance/latency benchmark suites, preferrably
automated, are welcome, of course ;)
fwiw, i did some benchmarks, and will do with new hardware soon:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote:
Hello,
Here I list several issues which are relevant to Flash but may be not
envisioned by Reiser4.
1. Bad Blocks. NAND flashes are shipped with bad blocks randomly
scattered over flash. Also new bad blocks may
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hans Reiser wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:52:12 +0300, Markus =?UNKNOWN?Q?T=F6rnqvist?= said:
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Of course, I've worked on sufficiently few big
On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:35:51 CDT, David Masover said:
My feeling is that you create the standard as you create the test, not
the other way around. If the test works, then there are by definition
few bugs if any in the system itself -- any other bugs are actually in
the application, not the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:35:51 CDT, David Masover said:
My feeling is that you create the standard as you create the test, not
the other way around. If the test works, then there are by definition
few bugs if any in the
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
This is exactly why it should be in the kernel once the developers can't
find any more bugs. Marked as experimental, mainly, but in the kernel
where real users can throw cobol/Java/sql bastardizations at it and
break it.
Sure.
On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:52:12 +0300, Markus =?UNKNOWN?Q?T=F6rnqvist?= said:
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Of course, I've worked on sufficiently few big projects that I'm still
naive enough to believe that unit tests _can_ catch everything, if
they're done
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:52:12 +0300, Markus =?UNKNOWN?Q?T=F6rnqvist?= said:
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Of course, I've worked on sufficiently few big projects that I'm still
naive enough to believe that unit tests _can_ catch
What Vladimir failed to say was that it is our recent changes to
accomodate the kernel maintainers that are unstable, we had previously
reached the point where none of our internal tests could make it crash.
I hope that he did not put these unstable changes on our website for
users to see them
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:43:52AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
What Vladimir failed to say was that it is our recent changes to
accomodate the kernel maintainers that are unstable, we had previously
reached the point where none of our internal tests could make it crash.
I hope that he did not put
Markus Törnqvist wrote:
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:43:52AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
What Vladimir failed to say was that it is our recent changes to
accomodate the kernel maintainers that are unstable, we had previously
reached the point where none of our internal tests could make it crash.
On So, 2005-05-22 at 20:12 +0300, Markus TXrnqvist wrote:
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:43:52AM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
What Vladimir failed to say was that it is our recent changes to
accomodate the kernel maintainers that are unstable, we had previously
reached the point where none of our
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2005 23:49:00 +0200, Pysiak Satriani said:
I remember Hans saying that r4 is so stable that the developers themselves
can not find any more bugs.
Which in reality probably means It *probably* won't eat
On Sun, 22 May 2005 19:22:51 CDT, David Masover said:
This is exactly why it should be in the kernel once the developers can't
find any more bugs. Marked as experimental, mainly, but in the kernel
where real users can throw cobol/Java/sql bastardizations at it and
break it.
Oh, I agree
Hello
On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 21:53, Martin Piayda wrote:
Hi,
I'm missing O_DIRECT support in the current Reiser4 implementation (up
to Kernel 2.6.12-rc4-mm).
Calling sys_open(myfile, O_RDWR | O_DIRECT, 0) fails with -22.
Is this support planned, did I miss something, should I get my own
On Sat, 07 May 2005 16:11:19 +0200
__ukasz Mierzwa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Is there a possibility that You will release reiser4 patches for
2.6.12-rc kernels? I wan't to give it a shot but namesys.com/pub got
only patches for 2.6.11 and 2.6.12-mm kernels. Thanks in advance.
__ukasz
Andrew Clausen wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 08:10:18PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
The blocklist is only needed to find the blocks in the nested file,
which is huge. (I don't know anything about reiser packing, but
things like tail-merging aren't a serious problem.)
Yet, it's still a
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:41:16PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Are you familiar with convertfs?
http://members.optusnet.com.au/clausen/ideas/convertfs.txt
How easy is it to get the blocklist needed? It seems like Reiser4's
packing doesn't help here...
The blocklist is only needed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Clausen wrote:
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:41:16PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Are you familiar with convertfs?
http://members.optusnet.com.au/clausen/ideas/convertfs.txt
How easy is it to get the blocklist needed? It seems like
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 06:05:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Clausen wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 05:10:08PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
To support doing what to Reiser4?
parted is a disk management project -- specifically, a
Hans Reiser wrote:
I think someone is going to pay us to write the online repacker in the
very near future, though I can't say their name.
Giovanni, if by parted support you mean that you are going to write a
resizer (and now that I take a moment to remember what parted does it
seems certain you
Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
Hans Reiser wrote:
I think someone is going to pay us to write the online repacker in the
very near future, though I can't say their name.
Giovanni, if by parted support you mean that you are going to write a
resizer (and now that I take a moment to remember
On Friday 06 May 2005 13:31, Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
Hans Reiser wrote:
I think someone is going to pay us to write the online repacker in the
very near future, though I can't say their name.
Giovanni, if by parted support you mean that you are going to write a
resizer (and now
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Clausen wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 09:47:00PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Perhaps it would be a good idea to release at least an offline repacker.
To be able to resize. That is the crucial feature. Performance isn't
quite so huge,
Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am looking to know if someone have time to share with me to add
the necessary code
inside 'parted' to support Reiser4.
May be 1 or 2 hours per day.
The reference page is:
http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/#maillist
I
Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am looking to know if someone have time to share with me to add
the necessary code
inside 'parted' to support Reiser4.
May be 1 or 2 hours per day.
The reference page is:
http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/#maillist
I
Jander wrote:
Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am looking to know if someone have time to share with me to add
the necessary code
inside 'parted' to support Reiser4.
May be 1 or 2 hours per day.
The reference page is:
http://www.gnu.org/software/parted/#maillist
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am looking to know if someone have time to share with me to add the
necessary code
inside 'parted' to support Reiser4.
To support doing what to Reiser4?
parted is a disk management project --
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 05:10:08PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
To support doing what to Reiser4?
parted is a disk management project -- specifically, a way to create,
delete, and resize partitions. Think of it as fdisk with nicer units
and built-in resizefs tools.
This would, I think,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Clausen wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 05:10:08PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
To support doing what to Reiser4?
parted is a disk management project -- specifically, a way to create,
delete, and resize partitions. Think of it as fdisk with
On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 17:10 -0500, David Masover wrote:
This would, I think, involve creating a fully functional
resizefs.reiser4 -- something I distinctly remember Hans telling me not
to do, because my approach also created (most of) an online repacker,
which is something Hans wants to do for
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 06:05:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Couldn't this just be a wrapper to mkfs.reiser4 and fsck.reiser4?
Almost.
As it stands, libparted can't delegate out I/O to external programs,
because its filesystem API address in terms of disk sectors rather
than partitions.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Clausen wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 06:05:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Couldn't this just be a wrapper to mkfs.reiser4 and fsck.reiser4?
Almost.
As it stands, libparted can't delegate out I/O to external programs,
because its
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan Briggs wrote:
On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 17:10 -0500, David Masover wrote:
This would, I think, involve creating a fully functional
resizefs.reiser4 -- something I distinctly remember Hans telling me not
to do, because my approach also
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 09:47:00PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Perhaps it would be a good idea to release at least an offline repacker.
To be able to resize. That is the crucial feature. Performance isn't
quite so huge, although Hans may start squirming when someone benchmarks
performance
I think someone is going to pay us to write the online repacker in the
very near future, though I can't say their name.
Giovanni, if by parted support you mean that you are going to write a
resizer (and now that I take a moment to remember what parted does it
seems certain you do mean that), I
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 01:14:26PM -0600, Boyd Waters wrote:
A test machine could be a $499 Mac Mini. I would be willing to chip
in for one if we can identify a tester. Would anyone else be willing
to help me fund this?
IIRC a fund drive was talked about earlier and for some reason
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 06:31:02PM +0200, Adrian Ulrich wrote:
And i'd still buy them a Mac.. No problem..
But then again, maybe we should organize this by each posting to
the list the amount they donated, and what's left (of what one
costs in Moscow) and have the Namesys guys handle it through
Adrian Ulrich wrote:
Hi,
IIRC a fund drive was talked about earlier and for some reason
discarded. Can't even remember who the guy behind it was, I'm afraid.
It was me..
And i'd still buy them a Mac.. No problem..
-- Adrian
We won't turn down hardware, but it might be a few months
Hi,
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:03:13PM -0500, Jake Maciejewski wrote:
Now that reiser4 seems to be working on AMD64, I'm trying to test it on
PPC. Unfortunately, I haven't even been able to mount a reiser4 FS.
Unfortunately we could not test reiser4 on PPC because of lack of test machine.
On Mon, 2005-05-02 at 18:10 +0400, Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:03:13PM -0500, Jake Maciejewski wrote:
Now that reiser4 seems to be working on AMD64, I'm trying to test it on
PPC. Unfortunately, I haven't even been able to mount a reiser4 FS.
Unfortunately we
On Mon, 2005-05-02 at 18:10 +0400, Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:03:13PM -0500, Jake Maciejewski wrote:
Now that reiser4 seems to be working on AMD64, I'm trying to test it on
PPC. Unfortunately, I haven't even been able to mount a reiser4 FS.
Unfortunately we
I get this error as well on a newly-created reiser4 filesystem.
I'm using 2.6.12_rc3 with patches from 2.6.11-mm3 (which seemed to
apply cleanly) on a Macintosh Mini.
What other debugging information is needed?
~ boyd
Boyd Waters
Socorro, New Mexico
Well, now that I've actually checked it,
On May 2, 2005, at 8:10 AM, Alex Zarochentsev wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:03:13PM -0500, Jake Maciejewski wrote:
Now that reiser4 seems to be working on AMD64, I'm trying to test
it on
PPC. Unfortunately, I haven't even been able to mount a reiser4 FS.
Unfortunately we could not test
[please Cc, i'm not subscribed atm]
Hello list,
after I started using a loop-mounted reiser4 fs, I was getting
ReiserFS: hda1: warning: clm-2100: nesting info a different FS
would you try to see whether the attached patch helps?
The patch reduces the statistical probability for
Hi,
for the notice, it seems the soft lockup bug is fixed in 2.6.12-rc2-mm3
which has been running for 8 hours now without a glitch.
Cheers,
Mik
Vladimir Saveliev a écrit :
Hello
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 12:36, Mickael Marchand wrote:
Hi,
I am giving a shot at reiser4 to make rsync
Hello
On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 21:47, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
[please Cc, i'm not subscribed atm]
Hello list,
after I started using a loop-mounted reiser4 fs, I was getting
ReiserFS: hda1: warning: clm-2100: nesting info a different FS
would you try to see whether the attached patch
Hello
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 12:36, Mickael Marchand wrote:
Hi,
I am giving a shot at reiser4 to make rsync snapshots backups (using
hard links and incremental rsync).
this works definitely great apart from 2 minor bugs :)
1 : it seems that mv directory/ directory2/ changes the mtime of
Hi,
Vladimir Saveliev wrote:
Hello
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 12:36, Mickael Marchand wrote:
Hi,
I am giving a shot at reiser4 to make rsync snapshots backups (using
hard links and incremental rsync).
this works definitely great apart from 2 minor bugs :)
1 : it seems that mv directory/
hmm just got 3 more soft lookups in a few hours (2/3 hours I think) ;)
my script (attached in case you want to try it) for backups basically do:
rm -rf hourly.11
mv hourly.10 hourly.11
...
mv hourly.1 hourly.2
mv hourly.0 hourly.1
cp -al hourly.1 hourly.0
rsync [various options] /home/ hourly.0/
For your first problem,
see fs/reiser4/plugin/dir/hashed_dir.c, line 540,
comment from_dir-i_mtime = CURRENT_TIME; away,
and recompile your kernel.
mtime shouldn't update when you try to mv, and thus
will not break your backup scripts.
Kathy
On Apr 8, 2005 4:51 PM, Mickael Marchand
[EMAIL
Kathy KN (HK) wrote:
For your first problem,
see fs/reiser4/plugin/dir/hashed_dir.c, line 540,
comment from_dir-i_mtime = CURRENT_TIME; away,
and recompile your kernel.
mtime shouldn't update when you try to mv, and thus
will not break your backup scripts.
ho, thanks,
looks like a
David Masover schrieb:
sergey ivanov wrote:
So how about this deadlock? Is there any expectation about fix for it?
Wbr,
Sergey.
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
Vladimir Saveliev schrieb:
This problem is fixed, but running your test during several hours caused
reiser4 crash. It just
So how about this deadlock? Is there any expectation about fix for it?
Wbr,
Sergey.
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
Vladimir Saveliev schrieb:
This problem is fixed, but running your test during several hours caused
reiser4 crash. It just happened, so, tomorrow I will take a look at it.
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
sergey ivanov wrote:
So how about this deadlock? Is there any expectation about fix for it?
Wbr,
Sergey.
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
Vladimir Saveliev schrieb:
This problem is fixed, but running your test during several hours
Sorry for this ``not so smart'' question, is there quota support in
reiser4? Or quota is not in the main idea of reiser4?
There is not quota support for Reiser4. I'm looking into it but first
I have to come up with a reasonable semantics + idea of efficient
implementation :) The framework of
Hello
On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 14:37, Jan Kara wrote:
Sorry for this ``not so smart'' question, is there quota support in
reiser4? Or quota is not in the main idea of reiser4?
There is not quota support for Reiser4. I'm looking into it but first
I have to come up with a reasonable semantics
Hello,
On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 14:37, Jan Kara wrote:
Sorry for this ``not so smart'' question, is there quota support in
reiser4? Or quota is not in the main idea of reiser4?
There is not quota support for Reiser4. I'm looking into it but first
I have to come up with a reasonable
Vladimir Saveliev schrieb:
This problem is fixed, but running your test during several hours caused
reiser4 crash. It just happened, so, tomorrow I will take a look at it.
I was able to deadlock kernel 2.6.11 + reiser4-for-2.6.11-3.patch.gz
+ elevator=cfq.
This time it happend during the first
Hello.
We use dbench-2.0 in our testing.
Well, dbench-3.02 is added to stressing suit too.
Thanks,
Lena.
Hans Reiser wrote:
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
I guess dbench-3.x stress testing is missing from your grand archive ;-)
Yes, actually, I suspect it is. Elena, please comment.
Hello
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 02:23, Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
Hi,
If I'm running plain 2.6.11(.0) patched with
reiser4-for-2.6.11-broken-out.2.gz I can hang reiser4 when running
When you say hang reiser4 do you mean that system freezes completely
(does not respord to key pressing, etc)?
Hi!
Thanks. I noticed there is already dbench-3.03 available:
ftp://ftp.samba.org/pub/tridge/dbench/dbench-3.03.tar.gz
E.Gryaznova wrote:
Hello.
We use dbench-2.0 in our testing.
Well, dbench-3.02 is added to stressing suit too.
Thanks,
Lena.
--
lg, Chris
Vladimir Saveliev schrieb:
Hello
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 02:23, Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
Hi,
If I'm running plain 2.6.11(.0) patched with
reiser4-for-2.6.11-broken-out.2.gz I can hang reiser4 when running
When you say hang reiser4 do you mean that system freezes completely
(does not respord to
901 - 1000 of 1292 matches
Mail list logo
