On 10 May 2010 01:56:09 GMT
Johannes Hofmann wrote:
> This sounds exactly like what I was observing before
> the read-ahead fix in 69adbed48cd5565446e8013fcc5131405a9e7c05
> Any chance, that you don't have that fix for some reason?
Looks to be all there.
Just in case I've blown
Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
>Hi,
>
>OK I think I have something concrete - running hammer rebalance on
> a freshly booted machine runs the active memory usage up past 2GB and it
> stays there after the rebalance has finished even when the machine is left
> alone for some time.
>
>
: Hi,
:
: OK I think I have something concrete - running hammer rebalance on
:a freshly booted machine runs the active memory usage up past 2GB and it
:stays there after the rebalance has finished even when the machine is left
:alone for some time.
:
: Unmounting and remounting th
Hi,
OK I think I have something concrete - running hammer rebalance on
a freshly booted machine runs the active memory usage up past 2GB and it
stays there after the rebalance has finished even when the machine is left
alone for some time.
Unmounting and remounting the fil
On Sat, 8 May 2010 11:08:23 -0700 (PDT)
Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> : I'm running v2.7.2.3.g01603-DEVELOPMENT on a box which I've just
> :upgraded from an AMD64 3200+ single core with 1.5GB of RAM to a Phenom II
> :955 quad core with 4GB of RAM. The usage pattern hasn't changed. Prior to
> :th
: I'm running v2.7.2.3.g01603-DEVELOPMENT on a box which I've just
:upgraded from an AMD64 3200+ single core with 1.5GB of RAM to a Phenom II
:955 quad core with 4GB of RAM. The usage pattern hasn't changed. Prior to
:the upgrade the box was using around 250 megs of swap and apparently neede
Hi,
I'm running v2.7.2.3.g01603-DEVELOPMENT on a box which I've just
upgraded from an AMD64 3200+ single core with 1.5GB of RAM to a Phenom II
955 quad core with 4GB of RAM. The usage pattern hasn't changed. Prior to
the upgrade the box was using around 250 megs of swap and apparen
