| To: | David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 12 Dec 2005 00:57:12 -0700 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20051212014633.GC19154461@melbourne.sgi.com> |
| References: | <20051207183531.5c13e8c5.masaki-c@nict.go.jp> <20051208070841.GJ501696@melbourne.sgi.com> <20051209104148.346f2ff5.masaki-c@nict.go.jp> <20051212014633.GC19154461@melbourne.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> writes: > > There are two immediate solutions that I can see to your problem: > > 1. Buy more RAM. If you can afford 10TB of disk, then you can > afford to buy at least a couple of GB of RAM to go with it. > > 2. Remake your filesystem with a smaller log so that > it can't hold as many active items. It is nasty that XFS can get into this state though. Would it make sense to limit the in memory log based on available memory? With such a limit it would still work, but slower, right? -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, Chris Wedgwood |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | right way to report bugs, Jan Derfinak |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, Chris Wedgwood |
| Next by Thread: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, David Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |