xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LVM vs. buffer_heads

To: "Martin K. Petersen" <mkp@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LVM vs. buffer_heads
From: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 19:57:38 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <yq1g0nfkfvy.fsf@tyra.mkp.net>
Reply-to: cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
"Martin K. Petersen" wrote:

> I've done some test runs of LVM with the legacy I/O path over the
> weekend.  No corruption except one minor caveat, that I'll get back to
> below.
>
> Russell/Steve: Did you ever experience *runtime* corruption?
>
> Reason I ask is that I've had a box running for 4 days on a 5 disk
> striped LV doing bonnie++, repetetive kernel builds and postmark
> without any corruption whatsoever.
>
> Until I unmounted the filesystem, that is.  At which point at least
> the log got completely garbled (Subsequent mount attempts yielded
> BUG() in xfs_log_recover.c:2655).

Hmm still not making it through a glibc build.
I'm seeing corruption in .d files (dependency files).

I'm running doio at the moment to see if it turns up anything.


>
> I will investigate.
>
> ``Quick! To the electron microscope''...
>
> --
> Martin K. Petersen      Cereal Bowl Engineer, Linuxcare, Inc.
> http://mkp.net/         SGI XFS, Linux/PA-RISC, GNOME

--
Russell Cattelan
cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>