On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 05:14:01PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > ... > Not sure that this impression is entirely accurate. The biggest problem > with MFI machines is online RAID management. The storage driver itself > matured very quickly and has been very reliable.
Ah; good to know: thank you. > >Well, now a colleague is trying to run 6.2-R on one of these 2950s; dmesg > >says the controller is: > > > >mfi0: <Dell PERC 5/i> mem 0xd80f0000-0xd80fffff,0xfc4e0000-0xfc4fffff irq > >78 at device 14.0 on pci2 > ... > >and the disks looks like: > > > >mfid0: <MFI Logical Disk> on mfi0 > >mfid0: 418176MB (856424448 sectors) RAID volume '' is optimal > > > > Looks A OK to me. Even better. :-) > >The intended production workload involves creation and deletion of > >a large number of files rather rapidly. > ... > sysctl vfs.ffs.doasyncfree=0 might help. Running the syncer more > frequently might also help, but I don't recall the sysctl node for > that. OK; I've relayed your suggestion to my colleague, but haven't heard back from her yet. > ... > Very strange. No chance that it was due to files that were deleted but > still referenced by open apps? I don't think so. She's deployed 13 other boxen over the last few years with -- naturally! -- different hardware specs, but all running essentailly the same application. The big question for her is whether or not the Dell 2950, as specified, will do the job. > ... > This sounds purely like a filesystem issue, not an MFI driver issue. Hmmm... I'll admit to knowing little about RAID configurations; is it possible that some RAID configurations might exacerbate problems with such a workload -- or that others might be more amenable to it? Thanks again! Peace, david -- David H. Wolfskill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Believe SORBS at your own risk: 63.193.123.122 has been static since Aug 1999. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.
pgpprO0rFWQoZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
