xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Issue with 2.6.23 and drbd 8.0.7

To: Laurent CARON <lcaron@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Issue with 2.6.23 and drbd 8.0.7
From: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:29:00 +1100
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <47678124.80906@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <20071217143655.chiehahh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20071217220354.GU4396912@xxxxxxx> <4766F58C.8040000@xxxxxxxxx> <20071217233759.GB4396912@xxxxxxx> <47678124.80906@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 09:13:24AM +0100, Laurent CARON wrote:
> David Chinner wrote:
> > Hmmm - no real surprises there, but the numbers are well lower than the
> > ~960MB low memory limit. I suspect that there's something at around
> > 2.55am that does a filesystem traversal and that blows out the memory
> > usage of these slab caches and you run out of lowmem...
> 
> Thanks David for this information,
> 
> On the previous setup (same pieces of software), we didn't had that kind
> of problem.
> 
> Do you think that more memory is used while using XFS on a filesystem
> traversal than with ReiserFS (the previous setup used ReiserFS)?

Yes, XFS will use more memory - XFS's inodes are substantially larger
in memory than for reiserfs and so will consume more memory for the
same number of cached inodes.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group


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