On 07.Jul.2014, at 06:51, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 7/6/2014 9:09 PM, Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
>> Yes, I run XFS on ~1T (900G) partition, so I don't think I need to
>> consider inode64 for that. What is the official situation with XFS and
>> CentOS 5? It was in technology preview in CentOS 5.4
- Original Message -
| John R Pierce writes:
|
| > On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
| >> inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
| >> Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It
| >> has
| >> to do with inode allocation. If you h
On 07/06/2014 11:09 PM, Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
> John R Pierce writes:
>
>> On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
>>> inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
>>> Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It has
>>> to do with inode allocati
On 7/6/2014 9:09 PM, Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
> Yes, I run XFS on ~1T (900G) partition, so I don't think I need to
> consider inode64 for that. What is the official situation with XFS and
> CentOS 5? It was in technology preview in CentOS 5.4 I think? How about
> now?
5 is very close to EOL now.
John R Pierce writes:
> On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
>> inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
>> Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It has
>> to do with inode allocation. If you have older operating systems
>> mounting a file
- Original Message -
| Eliezer Croitoru writes:
|
| > I had similar issue: A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of
| > a
| > very large system. I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync
| > the
| > backup and then somewhere I got this issue. There were lots of
| > files
| > the
Eliezer Croitoru writes:
> I had similar issue: A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of a
> very large system. I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync the
> backup and then somewhere I got this issue. There were lots of files
> there and the system has 8GB of ram and CentOS 6.5 64bit
- Original Message -
| On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
| > inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well.
| > Once you mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It
| > has to do with inode allocation. If you have older operating
| > systems mou
On 7/1/2014 9:40 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
> inode64 is a mount time option and it is a one way option as well. Once you
> mounted a filesystem with inode64 you can't go back. It has to do with inode
> allocation. If you have older operating systems mounting a filesystem with
> inode64 will
- Original Message -
| I had similar issue:
| A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of a very large system.
| I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync the backup and then
| somewhere I got this issue.
| There were lots of files there and the system has 8GB of ram and
| CentOS
| 6
- Original Message -
| "James A. Peltier" writes:
|
| > | I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under
| > | high
| > | load with very many small files. Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4
| > | million files on this filesystem. New files are being written to
| > | the
| >
I had similar issue:
A nfs server with XFS as the FS for backup of a very large system.
I have a 2TB raid-1 volume and I started rsync the backup and then
somewhere I got this issue.
There were lots of files there and the system has 8GB of ram and CentOS
6.5 64bit.
I didn't bother to look at the
On Jul 1, 2014 11:02 PM, "Frank Cox" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:09:04 -0700
> Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
>
> > What's the proper way to open a bug for this against CentOS 5 / RHEL 5?
>
> If you try it with the latest kernel and it works, then I don't think
there is any bug to file.
Have yo
On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:09:04 -0700
Alexandru Cardaniuc wrote:
> What's the proper way to open a bug for this against CentOS 5 / RHEL 5?
If you try it with the latest kernel and it works, then I don't think there is
any bug to file.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvillet
"James A. Peltier" writes:
> | I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
> | load with very many small files. Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4
> | million files on this filesystem. New files are being written to the
> | FS all the time, until I get to 9-11 mln small fil
"James A. Peltier" writes:
> | I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
> | load with very many small files. Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4
> | million files on this filesystem. New files are being written to the
> | FS all the time, until I get to 9-11 mln small fil
- Original Message -
|
| Hi All,
|
| I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
| load with very many small files.
| Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4 million files on this filesystem.
| New files are being written to the FS all the
| time, until I get to 9-11 mln
- Original Message -
|
| Hi All,
|
| I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high
| load with very many small files.
| Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4 million files on this filesystem.
| New files are being written to the FS all the
| time, until I get to 9-11 mln
Hi All,
I am having an issue with an XFS filesystem shutting down under high load with
very many small files.
Basically, I have around 3.5 - 4 million files on this filesystem. New files
are being written to the FS all the
time, until I get to 9-11 mln small files (35k on average).
at some poi
19 matches
Mail list logo
