xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS "freezes" on AMD systems

To: linux-xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS "freezes" on AMD systems
From: Florin Andrei <florin@xxxxxxx>
Date: 26 Sep 2002 13:35:28 -0700
In-reply-to: <20020925185258.664fece3.random@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <15761.27018.659158.237109@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020925075844.GA26750@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <15762.6020.364002.585622@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3D9239C1.2070704@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20020925185258.664fece3.random@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
He's right, but you're right too. :-)
A properly tuned IDE works fine usually.
However, all other things being equal, a disk connected via SCSI "feels"
faster than the same HDD gear connected via IDE. The reason being the
way SCSI talks with the rest of the system (lower CPU usage, etc).

On Wed, 2002-09-25 at 15:52, Vincent Janelle wrote:
> irrelevant and flamebait.
> 
> Proper tuning of DMA settings will help, as well as making sure that using 
> the correct IDE driver is selected.
> 
> hdparm -c1 -d1 -u1 /dev/hd[a,b,c,etc] will turn on 32bit write support, dma, 
> and unmasked irq's.  
> 
> man hdparm of course before doing any of this, YMMV.
> 
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:33:37 +0200
> Bernhard Erdmann <be@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Matthias Klose wrote:
> > [...]
> > >>>When unpacking large tarballs or copying data bigger than 20MB on a
> > >>>XFS file system, the system seems to freeze for about three to five
> > >>>seconds
> > [...]
> > >>hdparm(8) may help here, or you may beed to recompile the kernel with
> > >>different IDE chipset support[1].
> > [...]
> > > Thanks for the pointer! That fixed my setup.
> > 
> > Use SCSI. Use SCSI. Use SCSI. Use...
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
-- 
Florin Andrei

"Security measures are characterized less by their manner of success
than by their manner of failure." - Bruce Schneier


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