| To: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix inode reclaim problems (hopefully) |
| From: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 7 Jan 2010 21:49:23 +1100 |
| In-reply-to: | <1262819125-27083-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1262819125-27083-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 10:05:23AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > These two patches seem to fix the inode reclaim issues I've been > able to reproduce lately. The changes are still running xfsqa in a > loop to confirm this, but the directory/small file stress test I've > been running to trigger the problem has run for 10 hours with these > fixes instead of dying after 20-30 minutes. Still running xfsqa 11 hours later without any problem, so it looks like this series fixes the problem I was seeing. Score another win for the new tracing code :) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | how does sectsz is determined ?, Raz |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: how does sectsz is determined ?, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: reclaim inodes under a write lock, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Account User, UPGRADETEAM |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |