- 1. XFS 1.1 unlink() weirdness (score: 1)
- Author: Mihai RUSU <dizzy@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 06:26:25 +0300 (EEST)
- "test -x". Non-root mounted XFS partitions are OK. What kernel version(s)? charon:~# df -Th . Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use%
- /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg00233.html (7,220 bytes)
- 2. Re: XFS 1.1 unlink() weirdness (score: 1)
- Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Oct 2002 11:16:14 -0500
- earched the related document. But I can't solve this problem. The hard disk size is 80G byte,and That contains many files . it is u
- /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg00240.html (8,372 bytes)
- 3. avaliable (score: 1)
- Author: mm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 06:26:25 +0300 (EEST)
- include/linux/byteorder/swab.h-o 2001-07-26 22:45:47.000000000 +0200 +++ linux/include/linux/byteorder/swa
- /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01012.html (7,220 bytes)
- 4. memory extents host byte ordered (score: 1)
- Author: eve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Oct 2002 11:16:14 -0500
- s are getting stuck at state D. I have kdb and got a back trace of one the stuck nfsd processes. System :
- /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01019.html (8,372 bytes)
- 5. XFS 1.1 unlink() weirdness (score: 1)
- Author: Mihai RUSU <dizzy@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 06:26:25 +0300 (EEST)
- Hi We run a 2.4.9-31SGI_XFS_1.1 based server. While the free space got bellow 85% we observed that almost every operation on our XFS partition was slower. This should be somewhat normal when having F
- /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01791.html (7,220 bytes)
- 6. Re: XFS 1.1 unlink() weirdness (score: 1)
- Author: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Oct 2002 11:16:14 -0500
- If your filesytem has gotten fragmented over time then it is likely your 50mb file is spread across a lot of extents, removing a file with a large number of extents takes longer than a file with only
- /archives/xfs/2002-10/msg01798.html (8,468 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu