xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS Inode Size question.

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS Inode Size question.
From: Austin Gonyou <austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 22 Jan 2002 16:25:31 -0600
Cc: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, Nathan Straz <nstraz@xxxxxxx>, Linux XFS List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20020122225638.A21260@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20020122225638.A21260@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Andi,
  Thanks for this note. This will help greatly. Is there anything that I
can do to resolve this issue? A patch or something in /proc perhaps? 

On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 15:56, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 03:05:55PM -0600, Steve Lord wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 15:04, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> > > Scratch that...it just dropped back down about an hour ago. I wonder
> why
> > > that would be? I mounted a loopback device  around that time. Could
> that
> > > have anything to do with it?
> > 
> > About the only thing which would shrink it is a memory shortage, one
> > of the things this can cause is a shrink of the inode cache.
> 
> It's a known problem in 2.4 that it keeps too many dentries/inodes in
> memory 
> around.  It shouldn't keep more inodes than dentries for example, but 
> it does after some stress. It's one of the things that didn't get fixed
> in t
> he VM rewrite.  Fortunately it doesn't have too many bad effects except
> for
> some wasted memory and longer lookup times for inodes due to overlong
> hash 
> chains. 
> 
> -Andi
-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
Latin Proverb

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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