xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FYI: better workaround for updating 'df' info after 'rm' on xfs-vols

To: Linda Walsh <xfs@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: FYI: better workaround for updating 'df' info after 'rm' on xfs-vols
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 07:54:50 +1100
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <512C4C7A.60002@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <512C12B5.3070908@xxxxxxxxx> <20130226045038.GN5551@dastard> <512C4C7A.60002@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 09:47:38PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
> 
> >> Someone suggested cat [1|3] >/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches.
> > 
> > echo, not cat. It does work every time, whether you see anything
> > obvious or not. And if you want to reclaim inodes, then you want
> > "echo 2 > ..."
> ----
>       Erk...meant echo... too much draino on the braino
> (doesn't 3 include '2'? I thought it was a bit mask?)

Yes, it is a bit mask. 1 = page cache, 2 = slab cache, 3 = both.
Inode reclaim is part of the slab cache reclaim, so page cache
reclaim won't make any difference to the behaviour at all.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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