On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 06:25:39AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
it should retry from puffs_cookie2pnode in that case.
I also need to build a test case that reliabiliy reproduce the bug.
For now I run our build.sh -Uo release and come back the next day,
this is not very convenient.
As I
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 02:02:41PM +0100, Adam Hamsik wrote:
Just try to lower that number to some smaller one ?
sysctl(7) says:
kern.maxvnodes (KERN_MAXVNODES)
The maximum number of vnodes available on the system. This can
only be raised.
But it seems I can lower it
Hello,
I compiled a kernel with some more debug code.
kernel text is mapped with 6 large pages and 34 normal pages
Loaded initial symtab at 0x81258fa0, strtab at 0x81303f70,
# entries 29097
Copyright (c) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005,
2006,
On Mon 16 Jan 2012 at 13:17:17 +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
But it seems I can lower it from 26214 to 200 without a hitch. I have
no idea how mch room it has, however. We cannot get the number of used
vnode from userland, can we?
pstat -v gives the number of active vnodes; that may be
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 08:37:37PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
I don't think I'll be able to have this ready for netbsd-6, but I now know
this requires 2 changes that will require a kernel version bump, so theses
changes needs to go in before netbsd-6 is branched so that full
extended
While browsing the code for other stuff, I ran into what appears to be
an inconsistency in drvctl(4).
In most cases, when the device specified cannot be found, we return
ENXIO - Device not configured.
But in routine drvctl_command_get_properties(), if the device is not
found, we return
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 04:37:57PM +, David Holland wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 08:37:37PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
I don't think I'll be able to have this ready for netbsd-6, but I now know
this requires 2 changes that will require a kernel version bump, so theses
changes
hello. pstat -v should give you what you want to know.
-thanks
-Brian
On Jan 16, 1:17pm, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
} Subject: Re: PUFFS and existing file that get ENOENT
} On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 02:02:41PM +0100, Adam Hamsik wrote:
} Just try to lower that number to some smaller one ?
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 15:21:40 -0500 (EST)
Mouse mo...@rodents-montreal.org wrote:
However, I think that constitutes a good implementation of a bad idea.
This makes a file no longer a long list of octets; it becomes multiple
long lists of octets. The Mac did this, with resource forks and data
This makes a file no longer a long list of octets; it becomes
multiple long lists of octets. [...]
[...] I have always found the idea flaky myself (and sorry for the
rant): [...]
Yeah. I think it's a very interesting direction to take filesystems.
But this, interesting as it is, is
hi,
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:56:33AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
you can increase the chance by running
while :;do sysctl -w kern.maxvnodes=0; done
It will always fail:
bacasable# sysctl -w kern.maxvnodes=0
sysctl: kern.maxvnodes: sysctl() failed with Device busy
it tries to
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 08:46:44PM +, David Holland wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 07:37:19PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
The fisrt change is to the buffer cache.
My first reaction is that I don't think it's a good idea to make major
changes to the buffer cache at this stage
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:39:45PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
is branched. this won't ever be in netbsd-6 is not an option, I don't
think we can wait for netbsd-7 for this.
Why not?
Martin
hi,
Hello,
I'm working on porting the FreeBSD FFSv2 extended attributes support.
What we have right now only works for ffsv1 (it's a restriction in our
sources but it could be extended to ffsv2), and uses a file hierarchy
to store attributes. This has several issues, one being that it
hi,
the regression shown by yamt3.png seems bigger than i expected.
i guess there are some bugs...
anyway, thanks!
YAMAMOTO Takashi
The first one is tmpfs (2GB md)
The other is UFS
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 04:04:31 + (UTC)
From: YAMAMOTO
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 04:54:29AM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
The new implementation presents the default one-blob for file systems that
don't implement it. For NetBSD its currently implemented for UFS and is
tested for FFS with/without WAPBL, ext2fs and lfs. It is present in our
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:56:33 + (UTC)
y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
when the kernel wants to cache other files.
ie. whenever the kernel decides to reclaim it. :-)
you can increase the chance by running
while :;do sysctl -w kern.maxvnodes=0; done
or something like
hi,
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:56:33 + (UTC)
y...@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi) wrote:
when the kernel wants to cache other files.
ie. whenever the kernel decides to reclaim it. :-)
you can increase the chance by running
while :;do sysctl -w kern.maxvnodes=0; done
or
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:00:05PM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
have you considered to separate the entity being cached from vnode?
What would this buy us ? the data are intimely tied to the inode, cleaning
the cache when a file is deleted or would be more difficult, isn't it ?
iirc, irix
hi,
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:00:05PM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
have you considered to separate the entity being cached from vnode?
What would this buy us ? the data are intimely tied to the inode, cleaning
the cache when a file is deleted or would be more difficult, isn't it ?
it
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:39:45PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
Indeed. But that isn't really the question. The question is really
whether we're past the date for brand-new feature proposals for
netbsd-6... or at least ones that involve invasive changes.
No, the question is whenever
Manuel Bouyer bou...@antioche.eu.org wrote:
Because manu@ has put lots of efforts in getting glusterfs running,
and I think it's something we can market. But it's unusable with ffsv1
extattrs, we really need something better.
Well, it works, but it is so slow it suggests NetBSD is a
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:00:05PM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
have you considered to separate the entity being cached from vnode?
iirc, irix called it buffer cache target or such.
That sounds like probably a good idea, but I need to think about it
more.
One of the things we need to be
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 04:20:00PM -0500, Mouse wrote:
And I think the master tree for a (supposedly-)production OS is not
the place to be carrying out research experiments, not even if
another such OS is already doing it.
But my opinions seem to correlate negatively with NetBSD's these
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:28:57PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
I consider lfs second-class citizen at this time and if forward
compat if broken for the lfs module on the branch it's probably not
a big deal).
I don't consider that acceptable...
--
David A. Holland
dholl...@netbsd.org
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 08:38:28PM -0500, Mouse wrote:
And I think the master tree for a (supposedly-)production OS is not
the place to be carrying out research experiments, not even if
another such OS is already doing it.
The trouble, of course, is that there isn't really any such
26 matches
Mail list logo
