On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 11:40 +0200, Per Jessen wrote: > Couple of messages from the log: > > __alloc_pages: 1-order allocation failed > __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed > > Exactly why this system is running out of memory has yet to be established, > but it seems to > also cause one or two JFS filesystems to turn read-only? Which in turn only > exacerbates the > problem. > Is this intentional behaviour?
Ideally, it would be best to avoid this. There may be cases where we're part of the way into a transaction and without allocating memory, we can't complete it, leaving the file system in an inconsistent state. It isn't normal to have 0-order allocations fail. Is there anything in the syslog to indicate why jfs mounted read-only? There should be. Thanks, Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7393&alloc_id=16281&op=click _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
