Re: [CentOS] cachefs

Again, thanks for the confirmation On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 5:14 AM, Leon Fauster leonfaus...@googlemail.comwrote: Am 03.04.2014 um 04:15 schrieb Grant Street gra...@al.com.au: On 03/04/14 12:34, Rita wrote: How come I don't see any changes in the Centos 6.{3,4,5} release which mention

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

Am 03.04.2014 um 04:15 schrieb Grant Street gra...@al.com.au: On 03/04/14 12:34, Rita wrote: How come I don't see any changes in the Centos 6.{3,4,5} release which mention updates to cachefs? I don't know why they weren't in the release notesmaybe because it's a preview release? They

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

We are using CentOS 6.5 and it has been very stable. we were hit with bugs in 6.2 6.3 and 6.4. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-cachefs-tp5724928p5725725.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

. -- View this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-cachefs-tp5724928p5725725.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

this message in context: http://centos.1050465.n5.nabble.com/CentOS-cachefs-tp5724928p5725725.html Sent from the CentOS mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] cachefs efficiency

Hi We are testing out the efficiency of cachefs and I was wondering what values other people use to decide if * cachefs is providing value? * cache size is the right/best/optimal size? * There is enough cache hits to make it worth while? * what files are being re-used(read from cache) the most? *

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

Yes, compiler cache is different. I suppose I should ask is there something similar to cache? On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Nux! n...@li.nux.ro wrote: On 02.03.2014 15:58, Rita wrote: thanks steve. seems like we are in the same boat. I was wondering if there was an alternative to

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

On 02.03.2014 15:58, Rita wrote: thanks steve. seems like we are in the same boat. I was wondering if there was an alternative to cachefs like http://ccache.samba.org/ I don't see how a compiler cache could help you with your problem. That's a totally different thing. HTH Lucian -- Sent

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

Am 01.03.2014 um 13:48 schrieb Rita rmorgan...@gmail.com: has anyone been using cachefs with 6.x series? i have tried using it but i keep getting hung processes after 2 weeks. ATM, running 6.3 but was curious if its more stable on Centos 6.5? we use it with nfs (latest EL6 OS version). In

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

thanks steve. seems like we are in the same boat. I was wondering if there was an alternative to cachefs like http://ccache.samba.org/ On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Steven Tardy sjt5a...@gmail.com wrote:

[CentOS] cachefs

has anyone been using cachefs with 6.x series? i have tried using it but i keep getting hung processes after 2 weeks. ATM, running 6.3 but was curious if its more stable on Centos 6.5? -- --- Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.--

Re: [CentOS] cachefs

https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html-single/Storage_Administration_Guide/#rhel6storage-whatsnew fs-cache is a tech preview(Zero support from redhat). Tried cachefs on a few servers(don't remember if it was rhel 6.1 or 6.2 at the time), had problems