[reiserfs-list] Cannot mount reiserfs partition (more info)
Hello Again Here's some more info about the problem with my partition. when I mount it, I see in the syslog the next lines: -- Jun 22 10:11:13 deot kernel: reiserfs: checking transaction log (device 03:46) ... Jun 22 10:11:14 deot kernel: journal-1226: REPLAY FAILURE, fsck required! buffer write failed Jun 22 10:11:14 deot kernel: Replay Failure, unable to mount Jun 22 10:11:14 deot kernel: reiserfs_read_super: unable to initialize journal space -- Now, I though that maybe 'raw mode' would help me. the thing is that I haven't really got an idea how to use it, and couldn't find documents about it. I just want to save the files which are in there (and they are, I can see them with debugreiserfs!), any way to get access to them, even read-only? If raw mode is indeed what I need, can anybody please tell me how to use it? It's hard to feel like I've lost all the files there, while I can see them all using debugreiserfs.. Thanks!! Cya, Oren.
Re: [reiserfs-list] How to use resize_reiserfs?
No. You need to shift filesystem content to the beginning of the partitons. /bin/dd may help, dd if=/dev/hda5 bs=1024 skip=number of 1k block you added at \ beginning of=/dev/hda5 Use bigger block size if it is possible. ... I want to test this method first before recommending it for important data. Even it works, any crash during this operation will make you reiserfs unconsistent (`reiserfsck --rebuild-tree' should help with metadata but recovering of unformatted nodes may be a problem). Using of bigger block size will reduce copying time and the risk. Check twice what distance you want to shift reiserfs content to ! So, it is enough complex and risky operation :( can you try this on test system ? Oh, I don't have testing system and I would like to know how can I know number of 1k block you added at beginning. But it is so complex to me that I think I will create other partitin, move the data to it, and then create sybolic link to orginal directory.
Re: [reiserfs-list] kernel-2.4.6-pre3 to 2.2.19 NFS tests
On Thursday 14 June 2001 15:51, Christian Mayrhuber wrote: I've run bonnie on nfs over a 10MBit/s network on a ext2 and a reiserfs partition on the same disk. The Bad: The performance loss to ext2 on the same disk ist quit drastic, about 25% and this is only over a 10MBit/s network. What will happen on a 100MBit/s network? I have no chance to test it on 100MBit/s, SCSI hardware and a 3c59x card till monday. Try testing with Bonnie++, the file creation and deletion tests will give interesting results! ;) In one test I had an AIX machine that was moderately grunty (two fast POWER CPU's, 6 hard drives on a 160MB/s bus, 256M of RAM). When running Bonnie++ I found that the AIX machine could create files on my Thinkpad over a 10baseT NFS mount faster than it could create them on a local JFS file system! -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: [reiserfs-list] optimizing reiserfs for large files?
On Thursday 14 June 2001 12:18, grobe wrote: I have a significant loss of performance in bonnie tests. The writing intelligently-test e.g. gives me 20710 kB/s with reiserfs, while I get 24753 kB/s with ext2 (1 GB-file). How much RAM do you have? If you have more than 512M of RAM then the results won't be a good indication of true performance. Also older versions of bonnie never sync the data so the performance report depends to a large extent on how much data remains in the write-back cache at the end of the test! Bonnie++ addresses these issue. Also neither of those results is what you should expect from modern hardware. Machines that were typically sold in corner stores about a year ago (such as the machine under my desk) return results better than that. I have attached the results of an Athlon-800 with 256M of PC-133 RAM and a single 46G ATA-66 IBM hard drive. The machine was not the most powerful machine on the market when I bought it over a year ago. What types of hard drives does the machine have? -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page Version 1.92b --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- --Random- Concurrency 1 -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- MachineSize K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP temp 496M 447 98 28609 16 10608 7 718 98 34694 15 199.8 1 Latency 22328us2074ms 56626us 57412us 43123us2984ms Version 1.92b --Sequential Create-- Random Create temp-Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Read--- -Delete-- files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP 16 849 98 + +++ 15216 90 863 99 + +++ 3423 98 Latency 9168us 113us 249us 12778us 41us1744us 1.92b,1.92b,temp,1,993204157,496M,,447,98,28609,16,10608,7,718,98,34694,15,199.8,1,16,849,98,+,+++,15216,90,863,99,+,+++,3423,98,22328us,2074ms,56626us,57412us,43123us,2984ms,9168us,113us,249us,12778us,41us,1744us
Re: [reiserfs-list] kernel-2.4.6-pre3 to 2.2.19 NFS tests
Am Friday 22 June 2001 11:39 schrieben Sie: Try testing with Bonnie++, the file creation and deletion tests will give interesting results! ;) In one test I had an AIX machine that was moderately grunty (two fast POWER CPU's, 6 hard drives on a 160MB/s bus, 256M of RAM). When running Bonnie++ I found that the AIX machine could create files on my Thinkpad over a 10baseT NFS mount faster than it could create them on a local JFS file system! This is not the case for me, nfs performance never reaches local disk performance. I think the network is the limiting factor. I don't have a idea if the bonnie file creation numbers over nfs are good ones or not, at least stat seems to be speedy. 1GHZ Athlon AMI Megaraid Raid-5 138GB/total, kernel-2.4.6-pre5, local, reiserfs --- Version 0.99e --Sequential Create-- Random Create Unknown -Create-- --Stat--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Stat--- -Delete-- files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP 30 14169 99 + 105 16224 91 13047 96 + 100 14010 100 Unknown,,30,14169,99,+,105,16224,91,13047,96,+,100,14010,100 1GHz Athlon, client, Raid-5 array mounted over a 100MBit/s network -- Version 0.99e --Sequential Create-- Random Create Unknown -Create-- --Stat--- -Delete-- -Create-- --Stat--- -Delete-- files /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP /sec %CP 30 3578 30 13676 53 4682 33 3614 31 17797 49 4251 29 Unknown,,30,3578,30,13676,53,4682,33,3614,31,17797,49,4251,29 -- WfG, Chris
Re: [reiserfs-list] 3.5 vs 3.6
well, i know that 2.2. kernels work only with reiserfs 3.5 whereas 2.4.x can work with 3.6 as well i was asking about the differences between 3.5 and 3.6 You mentioned that in 3.5 there is a 2GB file-size limit - is that the only differencs? michal
Re: [reiserfs-list] reiserfs-raw
On Monday 18 June 2001 21:57, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: For Squid it would become very interesting if in some time (lets say about a year, maybe more) there is a good volatile permanent object store similar to reiserfs-raw but with a slightly more flexible application interface. One thing I have considered doing if I got a large amount of spare time (IE something that'll never happen) is to investigate getting the user-mode-linux code and taking the block IO part to make file systems run in user-space as a database interface. For something like a large squid box it might get a performance gain to have small operations (directory lookups) take place in user-land rather than have a system call for each one. Also it could potentially have some benefits for debugging. I thought that combining the above with a LD_PRELOAD library to take over the read/write/open/etc library calls could allow an application to think it's using regular files while it's really accessing a user-land process and talking over named pipes. Then you could test out a new version of a file system without risking crashing your machine! -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: [reiserfs-list] optimizing reiserfs for large files?
On Saturday 23 June 2001 01:11, Lars O. Grobe wrote: Also neither of those results is what you should expect from modern hardware. Machines that were typically sold in corner stores about a year ago (such as the machine under my desk) return results better than that. I have attached the results of an Athlon-800 with 256M of PC-133 RAM and a single 46G ATA-66 IBM hard drive. The machine was not the most powerful machine on the market when I bought it over a year ago. What types of hard drives does the machine have? G should be quite fast sca-scsi ibm-drives. As I wrote, it's an 320GB array in a EXP15 connected to a IBM ServeRAID4M. The Netfinity has two 833MHz PIIIs. Hmm. Sounds like the performance you describe is less than expected, and the performance is being over-stated too! When you get some more accurate results it'll look even worse... -- http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
