| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Strange kupdated behaviour with XFS |
| From: | jmarant@xxxxxxx (Jérôme Marant) |
| Date: | 24 Nov 2001 23:23:42 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <3812065659.20011124184847@huno.net> |
| References: | <87r8qoteuw.fsf@marant.org> <3812065659.20011124184847@huno.net> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 |
thomas <tom@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> yes i also noticed a strange behaviour of kupdated when i switched one
..
> it takes all cycles for some seconds (your scenario) or not.
> i disabled spindown on my harddisk (hdparm -S 0 /dev/xxx) and cpu time
> decreased to the values i had with reiserfs before (with enabled
> spindown time of 30m). maybe still slightly higher.
Thanks for the hint. How would you explain that?
BTW, I'm not used to hdparm. Do you have to run it once or every time
you are booting? If so, where/when do you run it? (what order in the
run level?).
Thanks.
--
Jérôme Marant <jerome@xxxxxxxxxx>
<jerome.marant@xxxxxxx>
http://marant.org
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re[4]: XFS+ext3 patches in same kernel... how?, Keith Matthews |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Fatal filesystem bug?, Stefan Smietanowski |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Strange kupdated behaviour with XFS, thomas |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Strange kupdated behaviour with XFS, Nathan Straz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |