On 07/06/2014 11:09 PM, Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com writes:
On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It has
to do with inode
- Original Message -
| John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com writes:
|
| On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
| inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
| Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It
| has
| to do with inode
On 07.Jul.2014, at 06:51, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 7/6/2014 9:09 PM, Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
Yes, I run XFS on ~1T (900G) partition, so I don't think I need to
consider inode64 for that. What is the official situation with XFS and
CentOS 5? It was in technology preview
Eliezer Croitoru elie...@ngtech.co.il writes:
I had similar issue: A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of a
very large system. I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync the
backup and then somewhere I got this issue. There were lots of files
there and the system has 8GB of ram and
- Original Message -
| Eliezer Croitoru elie...@ngtech.co.il writes:
|
| I had similar issue: A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of
| a
| very large system. I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync
| the
| backup and then somewhere I got this issue. There were lots of
|
John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com writes:
On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It has
to do with inode allocation. If you have older operating systems
On 7/6/2014 9:09 PM, Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
Yes, I run XFS on ~1T (900G) partition, so I don't think I need to
consider inode64 for that. What is the official situation with XFS and
CentOS 5? It was in technology preview in CentOS 5.4 I think? How about
now?
5 is very close to EOL now.
On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well. Once you
mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It has to do with inode
allocation. If you have older operating systems mounting a filesystem with
inode64 will
- Original Message -
| On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
| inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
| Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It
| has to do with inode allocation. If you have older operating
| systems
Hi All,
I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high load with
very many small files.
Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4 million files on this filesystem. New files
are being written to the FS all the
time, until I get to 9-11 mln small files (35k on average).
at some
- Original Message -
|
| Hi All,
|
| I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
| load with very many small files.
| Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4 million files on this filesystem.
| New files are being written to the FS all the
| time, until I get to 9-11
- Original Message -
|
| Hi All,
|
| I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
| load with very many small files.
| Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4 million files on this filesystem.
| New files are being written to the FS all the
| time, until I get to 9-11
James A. Peltier jpelt...@sfu.ca writes:
| I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
| load with very many small files. Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4
| million files on this filesystem. New files are being written to the
| FS all the time, until I get to 9-11 mln
James A. Peltier jpelt...@sfu.ca writes:
| I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
| load with very many small files. Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4
| million files on this filesystem. New files are being written to the
| FS all the time, until I get to 9-11 mln
On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:09:04 -0700
Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
What's the proper way to open a bug for this against CentOS 5 / RHEL 5?
If you try it with the latest kernel and it works, then I don't think there is
any bug to file.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~
On Jul 1, 2014 11:02 PM, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:09:04 -0700
Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
What's the proper way to open a bug for this against CentOS 5 / RHEL 5?
If you try it with the latest kernel and it works, then I don't think
there is any bug
I had similar issue:
A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of a very large system.
I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync the backup and then
somewhere I got this issue.
There were lots of files there and the system has 8GB of ram and CentOS
6.5 64bit.
I didn't bother to look at the
- Original Message -
| James A. Peltier jpelt...@sfu.ca writes:
|
| | I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under
| | high
| | load with very many small files. Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4
| | million files on this filesystem. New files are being written to
|
- Original Message -
| I had similar issue:
| A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of a very large system.
| I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync the backup and then
| somewhere I got this issue.
| There were lots of files there and the system has 8GB of ram and
| CentOS
|
19 matches
Mail list logo
