Dear Chris,
I just read the ChangeLog for 2.4.19-pre4 and saw, that there were
several problems concerning the interaction of NFS with VFS addressed by
recent patches. Furthermore, the 1GBit-driver ns83820 which we use has
been patched. So hopefully my problems will be solved in the near
Oleg Drokin wrote:
Hello!
On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 07:43:11PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is somehow related to knfsd, I think. I will tell you what I will be able
to find.
The fact, that only ext3 does not show this problem made me also think
about, that the kernel locking code might
Hi Oleg,
I don't have any network card errors in the output of ifconfig. The only
suspicious thing is the error message from samba, which is included in my
original posting.
Unfortunately, I cant't easily test undertake various test series, because
this is a production system and we have
Hello!
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 09:39:11AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately, I cant't easily test undertake various test series, because
this is a production system and we have mostly converted our reiser
partitions to ext3 for stability reasons. Now, that you encourage me, I
Dear Oleg,
OK, I have another box with a usual setup: eepro100 network card (100
MBit/s) and I can compare kernel 2.4.16 and kernel 2.4.18 on this machine.
But actually it sems to me, that there are some effects, that arise only
with the 1GBit network and I don't have a second GBit server
Hello!
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 10:29:32AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I have another box with a usual setup: eepro100 network card (100
MBit/s) and I can compare kernel 2.4.16 and kernel 2.4.18 on this machine.
But actually it sems to me, that there are some effects, that arise
Dear Nikita,
No, we don't use sync nfs mode, but we transfer files, which are larger
than the physical memory available and we have reduced the lower limit for
the perecentage of dirty buffer for activating bdflush in
/proc/sys/vm/bdflush from 30% to 5%, because the hardware RAID system is
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 06:16:39,Valdis Kletnieks wrote :
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 09:11:14 +0300, Oleg Drokin said:
It is somehow related to knfsd, I think. I will tell you what I will be
able to find.
The only thing that ext{2,3}/reiserfs differs right now is buffer flushing
policy, while
Dear Chris,
Thanks for your reply, as I mentioned I don't have a second GBit-server
here and our original machine is a production environment, so I can't
undertake all the test.
I don't even may reproduce my first test during the day, bcause the people
here might lose their samba-hosted
Thanks Chris for your understanding, we are really open here for new
developments (otherwise we would not use a linux server for
production...).
If you have approved your patches, I will surely give them a try since up
to know I did not experience any problems with my self-compiled 2.4.18
Dear Oleg,
Thanks for your additional investigations, since I use a 2.4.18 client
and a 2.4.16 server and do not use any special mount options for NFS, I
use NFSv3. Our peek performance is not the real problem here, I think the
blocks on the network interface are the things, that really
Hello!
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 08:53:56AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for your additional investigations, since I use a 2.4.18 client
and a 2.4.16 server and do not use any special mount options for NFS, I
use NFSv3. Our peek performance is not the real problem here, I think
On Sam, 03 Nov 2001, Dave Mason wrote:
to go fine (I let it do an extra 100MB before stopping it). Then I
tried copying it to the original partition. It again locked up, but
this time came back without umount/mount, so I'm not sure that served
any purpose the first time.
Are you using
On Sun, 4 Nov 2001 16:26:19 +0100, Dirk Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Are you using NFSv3? If not, do it! are you using reiserfs 3.6
on-disk format? You should.
Yes to both questions.
Another weird thing is that I don't seem to be able to umount reiserfs
partition (on the file server -
This just gets stranger and stranger
(all of the following is done locally on the file server, on the ext2
partition.)
I tarred up the directories that had been created via NFS by:
(cd /home;tar cf - Export) Export-home.tar
and
tar cf Export.tar Export
for the one created on ext2. And
On Fre, 19 Okt 2001, Dan wrote:
or is the code built right in these days?
No additional patches required for 2.4.12.
+--+
| BRAVENET WEB SERVICES |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
where is the 2.4.12 knfsd ?
or is the code built right in these days?
ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/misc-patches/
shows last one to be 2.4.2.
--
Dan
+--+
| BRAVENET WEB SERVICES |
| [EMAIL
r !
short question, is this the output from the known knfsd
problem(nfs-cache) in /var/log/messages:
Aug 1 15:35:27 filer3 kernel: vs-13042:
reiserfs_read_inode2: [260 53161 0x0 SD] not found
Aug 1 15:35:27 filer3 kernel: reiserfs: [CAN IGNORE: stale
NFS handle] knfsd-fh-mismatch:
(--[ on Wednesday 01 August 2001 16:29, Christian Gottschalch filled my
mailbox with ]::
^
^
^ so thats it, hope is another problem, because im using
^ kernel 2.4.5 with umount and knfsd patch, thought its
^ very stable and would use it for an production
^ system
if i were you, i'd use
Herman Knief writes:
On 28 Jun 2001 08:55:44 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Your best bet might be to update to 2.4.6-pre3 or higher, where a different
reiserfs knfsd workaround is in place.
So, I am trying to build an NFS server... Dual 850 PIII, 2 GB RAM, 3Ware adapter
with 8 x 80
Somewhere between 800MB and 1.2GB of data transfer. Basically, data transfer
between the client and server stops. The client (eventually) reports that the
server is not responding, the server CPU drops to almost idle, but the load
factor just steadily climbs.
Are you using knfsd?
On 28 Jun 2001 08:55:44 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
Your best bet might be to update to 2.4.6-pre3 or higher, where a different
reiserfs knfsd workaround is in place.
So, I am trying to build an NFS server... Dual 850 PIII, 2 GB RAM, 3Ware adapter
with 8 x 80 GByte disks, SuSE 7.2,
Title says it all: Reading the messages from this list for the last
month I could not find any hint if knfsd patch for 2.4.6 is still needed
or simply not being released yet. http://www.reiserfs.org/download.html
only offers linux-2.4.5-reiserfs-knfsd-patch.bz2 which yields hunks
failed
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 12:18:39PM +0200, Martin Goik wrote:
Title says it all: Reading the messages from this list for the last
month I could not find any hint if knfsd patch for 2.4.6 is still needed
or simply not being released yet. http://www.reiserfs.org/download.html
only offers
On Sunday, June 17, 2001 07:42:12 PM +0200 Jens Benecke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 07:23:34PM +0200, Dirk Mueller wrote:
and also what is going to happened if i use the kernel nfsd with
reiserfs, any loss of data ? or only slow operations ?
Both.
When is this
Philippe Gramoulle writes:
Danilov Nikita wrote:
But there are problems with 2.4.5 nfs _clients_.
Hi,
Could you explain a bit more about problems with 2.4.5 nfs clients ?
I'm was about to upgrade quite a few boxes here. (right now 1 is done so
i'll wait a bit and keep
Sorry - could not find the patch in the thread on LKML -
so could you give some pointers to your corrected nfs client
patch.
Cheers!
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 02:24:02PM +0200, Gergely Tamas wrote:
Hi!
Could you explain a bit more about problems with 2.4.5 nfs clients ?
I'm was about
Hi!
Sorry - could not find the patch in the thread on LKML -
so could you give some pointers to your corrected nfs client
patch.
These patches were not sent to the LKML, I think because Trond wanted to
wait some time (during I test it)...
But in the meantime, here they are ... They
28 matches
Mail list logo
