| To: | Roel van Meer <rolek@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS status update for May 2010 |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 16 Jun 2010 05:42:00 -0400 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <cone.1276679587.153934.32947.1001@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20100615132221.GA17385@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <cone.1276679587.153934.32947.1001@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) |
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:13:07AM +0200, Roel van Meer wrote: > As of today I'm running 2.6.35-rc3 with XFS and delayed logging on a 4GB > software raid0 we use to do nightly builds of about 150 software > packages (kernel, samba, etc) on Slackware 10.1. > > If there's anything specific I can do, please let me know. I have > some more hardware around to test with. As long as things just work everything is perfect! If you have any performance numbers that compare to older kernel / the non delayed logging case for your workload we would certainly be interested in them. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS stack corruption: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS stack corruption: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request, Michael Monnerie |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS status update for May 2010, Roel van Meer |
| Next by Thread: | Apply Now ...Part-Time Employment Offer...!, Maria Wong |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |