xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: linux 2.4.2-XFS

To: Galen Arnold <arnoldg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: linux 2.4.2-XFS
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:35:57 -0500
Cc: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, sandeen@xxxxxxx, Mike Pflugmacher <mikep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wayne Hoyenga <louis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Message from Galen Arnold <arnoldg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> of "Tue, 22 May 2001 11:30:00 CDT." <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105221127140.5964-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Steve,
> 
> The attached files were created with "/cat /proc/slabinfo" (my 2.4.2-XFS
> doesn't show a slabcache).  slab.1 was written immediately after iozone
> started, and slab.2 immediately after the first :

Sorry slabinfo was what I meant, Hmm, I didn't get an attachment there.

> 
>       __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed.
> 
> (approximately 10s later).
> 
> I'm looking at the patch now...

I am not sure it will really help you - the memory it frees is inodes, so
unless you have lots of inodes in cache it will not make a difference.

Steve

p.s. I presume you are using a HIGHMEM kernel.

> 
> -Galen
> 
>  On Tue, 22 May 2001,
> Steve Lord wrote:
> 
> >
> > Try the attached patch - it is against the 2.4.4 development tree, but it
> > should work in the release tree as well. I am still benchmarking and
> > scratching my head about this one, but it should help memory usage in
> > xfs. Is it possible to send the output of cat /proc/slabcache whilst
> > iozone is on its way to failing?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > > Eric,
> > >
> > > I found your name and address on a thread about linux & xfs.  I'm also
> > > seeing the "kernel: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation
> > > failed." error on a 2.4.2-XFS system I just setup.  We're comparing ext2,
> > > reiserfs, and xfs with iozone.  The xfs performance was looking great (50
> %
> > > better on writes than ext2 or reiserfs) until the box fell over scrolling
> > > these errors.  It hangs the box and only a hard reset will suffice to
> > > break out of it.
> > >
> > > I seem to be able to reproduce the error by running iozone this way:
> > >
> > >   iozone -s 4000m
> > >
> > > That's a big iozone run, but the systems all have 2gig memory so I've got
> > > to go big to get out of linux cache and see meaningful numbers.  Has ther
> e
> > > been any progress with this bug?  If you'd like, I can get you a temporar
> y
> > > acct. on the system where I'm testing.
> > >
> > > -Galen
> > >
> > >  --
> > > +
> > > Galen Arnold, system engineer--systems group       arnoldg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > National Center for Supercomputing Applications           (217) 244-3473
> > > 152 Computer Applications Bldg., 605 E. Spfld. Ave., Champaign, IL 61820
> >
> >
> 
> -- 
> +
> Galen Arnold, system engineer--systems group       arnoldg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> National Center for Supercomputing Applications           (217) 244-3473
> 152 Computer Applications Bldg., 605 E. Spfld. Ave., Champaign, IL 61820



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