| To: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfsrepair memory consumption |
| From: | "Daniele P." <daniele@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:36:47 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <20070321213611.GB1208@tuatara.stupidest.org> |
| Organization: | Interline |
| References: | <200703210843.TAA08491@larry.melbourne.sgi.com> <200703211208.27665.daniele@interline.it> <20070321213611.GB1208@tuatara.stupidest.org> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.9.5 |
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 22:36, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 12:08:27PM +0100, Daniele P. wrote: > > Phase 6 still uses little more memory (killed!). > > I will add more memory and will test later. > > Stupid question (Sorry, I didn't read the thread that carefully), is > there any reason you can't just add swap-space and let it thrash a > little? Oh, it's less expensive (less typing) to add ram because it's a virtual machine. Finally using the 2.8.20-1 version requires 1 GB of memory vs 750 MB for 2.6.20-1. Next time I will add more swap by default. Regards, Daniele P. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS and write barriers., Neil Brown |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS and write barriers., Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: xfsrepair memory consumption, Chris Wedgwood |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS bug???, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |