Hi,
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 08:08:40AM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> I'll commit it to head soon with a 1 month MFC, so that hopefully
> Oliver will have a chance to try it on his production server before
> the MFC.
I could only give it short exposure by now, but NAMEI stays stable. From
my side
> Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > > > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > > > > > Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> > > > > > > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> > > > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Rick Macklem w
Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > > > > Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> > > > > > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> > > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rick Macklem wrote
> > > > > >
> Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > > > Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> > > > > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > > >
> > > > > Rick Macklem wrote
> > > > > in
> > > > >
> > > > > <15276226
Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > > Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> > > > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > >
> > > > Rick Macklem wrote
> > > > in
> > > > <1527622626.3418715.1335445225510.java
> Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > > Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> > > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > >
> > > Rick Macklem wrote
> > > in
> > > <1527622626.3418715.1335445225510.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>:
> > >
Daniel Braniss wrote:
> > Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > Rick Macklem wrote
> > in
> > <1527622626.3418715.1335445225510.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>:
> >
> > rm> Steven Har
> Security_Multipart(Fri_Apr_27_13_35_56_2012_748)--
> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Rick Macklem wrote
> in <1527622626.3418715.1335445225510.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>:
>
> rm> Steven Hartland wrote:
> rm> > Original Message
Rick Macklem wrote
in <1527622626.3418715.1335445225510.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>:
rm> Steven Hartland wrote:
rm> > Original Message -
rm> > From: "Rick Macklem"
rm> > > At a glance, it looks to me like 8.x is affected. Note that the
rm> > > bug only affects the new NFS serve
Steven Hartland wrote:
> Original Message -
> From: "Rick Macklem"
> > At a glance, it looks to me like 8.x is affected. Note that the
> > bug only affects the new NFS server (the experimental one for 8.x)
> > when exporting ZFS volumes. (UFS exported volumes don't leak)
> >
> > If you ar
Original Message -
From: "Rick Macklem"
At a glance, it looks to me like 8.x is affected. Note that the
bug only affects the new NFS server (the experimental one for 8.x)
when exporting ZFS volumes. (UFS exported volumes don't leak)
If you are running a server that might be affected, j
Steven Hartland wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Rick Macklem"
> To: "Oliver Brandmueller"
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 1:24 AM
> Subject: Re: 9-STABLE, ZFS, NFS, ggatec - suspected memory leak
>
>
> > Oliver Brandm
Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 05:34:05PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Good work isolating this!
>
> Thank you!
>
> > I now see the problem. The new NFS server code assumed that
> > VOP_LOOKUP()
> > calls would not set SAVENAME, so it expected the path buffer to b
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 05:34:05PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Good work isolating this!
Thank you!
> I now see the problem. The new NFS server code assumed that VOP_LOOKUP()
> calls would not set SAVENAME, so it expected the path buffer to be free'd
> by the nfsvno_namei() when it hadn't s
- Original Message -
From: "Rick Macklem"
To: "Oliver Brandmueller"
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: 9-STABLE, ZFS, NFS, ggatec - suspected memory leak
Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
Hi,
After figuring an easy way to repeat the behaviour an
Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After figuring an easy way to repeat the behaviour and hunting it down
> to the combination of ZFS+newNFS and removal of files or directories I
> opened PR kern/167266
>
Oops, the patch for this is at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~rmacklem/namei-leak.patch
ri
Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After figuring an easy way to repeat the behaviour and hunting it down
> to the combination of ZFS+newNFS and removal of files or directories I
> opened PR kern/167266
>
Good work isolating this!
I now see the problem. The new NFS server code assumed that VOP
Hi,
After figuring an easy way to repeat the behaviour and hunting it down
to the combination of ZFS+newNFS and removal of files or directories I
opened PR kern/167266
Greetings,
Oliver
--
| Oliver Brandmueller http://sysadm.in/ o...@sysadm.in |
|
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:02:03PM +, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-March/239643.html
>
> Same issue different thread. Different software.
>
> Its not NFS, its ZFS.
>
> I don't really have a place to try it on 8.2, but my hunch fr
On 4/1/12 3:31 PM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
Philip:
Are you using:
- another file system (like UFS/FFS for the system or similar?)
- ZFS snapshots
- ZFS send
on the system?
Can you also see the NAMEI growth?
The system is 100% zfs.
zmirror for the os (2 disks)
zmysqlL(zmirror) for mysql l
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:02:03PM +, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-March/239643.html
>
> Same issue different thread. Different software.
>
> Its not NFS, its ZFS.
>
> I don't really have a place to try it on 8.2, but my hunch fr
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:02:03PM +, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-March/239643.html
>
> Same issue different thread. Different software.
>
> Its not NFS, its ZFS.
>
> I don't really have a place to try it on 8.2, but my hunch fr
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2012-March/239643.html
Same issue different thread. Different software.
Its not NFS, its ZFS.
I don't really have a place to try it on 8.2, but my hunch from things
I've done rather similarly which don't cause tell me its a new issue in
9.0,
Hi all,
Setup:
I'm running 2 machines (amd64, 16GB) with FreeBSD 9-STABLE (Mar 14 so
far) acting as NFS servers. They each serve 3 zpools (holding a single
zfs, hourly snapshots). The zpools each are 3-way mirrors of ggate
devices, each 2 TB, so 2 TB per zpool. Compression is "on" (to save
ba
24 matches
Mail list logo