| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS errors on large Infiniband fileserver setup |
| From: | Christian Herzog <horeizo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:10:02 +0200 |
| Cc: | <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20100923135425.GA32476@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <29252416bd0d9dc973a909e411dbec6a@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <eb1b2cfa58cddc44c92c3a87a0e0a6c4@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100923103802.GA16984@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5c4318884cb2c4d3983fd5231c2e4b17@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100923135425.GA32476@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | RoundCube Webmail/0.2-beta |
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 01:52:46PM +0200, Christian Herzog wrote: >> > Btw, what target do you use? According to >> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-stgt/msg02038.html it seems like the >> > stgt iser target has some issues that look quite similar to yours. >> we're using tgt which might have a similar problem. > > tgt and stgt is actually one and the same - the name is used a little > bit inconsistently. oh *blush* well I guess this might be our issue then.. >> As even IB over TCP is several times faster than our disks, we will now >> proceed w/o iSER to have the system running and then experiment with >> iSER on a test system. > > At least for NFS using RDMA natively mostly affects CPU usage and not > throughput, so if you have some CPU cycles to spare it might not make > much of a difference. even in our hardcore torture tests the system load is pretty reasonable, so I guess we're good. thanks, -Christian |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS errors on large Infiniband fileserver setup, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Problem with file system on iSCSI FileIO, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS errors on large Infiniband fileserver setup, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS errors on large Infiniband fileserver setup, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |