Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*XFS\s+crash\s+on\s+linux\s+raid\s*$/: 98 ]

Total 98 documents matching your query.

41. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 10:59:22 +1000
So, trying to remove an inode there was a corruption found on disk and it shut the filesystem down. Where there any I/o errors reported before the shutdown? Which was found again during log recovery.
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00362.html (12,288 bytes)

42. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 09:06:13 +0200
Le Fri, 4 May 2007 10:59:22 +1000 vous écriviez: Nope. To make it clear : the problem can be reproduce on several different systems, different motherboards, different drives, different RAID control
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00374.html (10,425 bytes)

43. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 17:33:44 +1000
Well, there's your problem. Stack overflows. IMO, if you use a filesystem, you shouldn't use 4k stacks. ;) If you remake you kernel with 8k stacks then your problems will most likely go away. Cheers,
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00375.html (9,404 bytes)

44. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 15:25:46 +0200
Le Fri, 4 May 2007 17:33:44 +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> écrivait: Well, I've double-checked the asm-i386/module.h, and it actually looks like 4K stacks is NOT the default, so I must be using
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00376.html (10,013 bytes)

45. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 09:55:30 -0500
Emmanuel Florac wrote: Le Fri, 4 May 2007 17:33:44 +1000 David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> écrivait: Well, there's your problem. Stack overflows. IMO, if you use a filesystem, you shouldn't use 4k stacks
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00377.html (10,506 bytes)

46. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 17:30:49 +0200
Le Fri, 04 May 2007 09:55:30 -0500 Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait: config-2.6.17.13: So the problem lies elsewhere... -- -- Emmanuel Florac | Intellique -
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00378.html (10,592 bytes)

47. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 17:58:21 +0200
Am Freitag 04 Mai 2007 schrieb Emmanuel Florac: Hello Emmanuel! When you can't use write barriers as XFS tell you in the logs, you better switch of write caching for the harddisks / raid controller,
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00379.html (10,591 bytes)

48. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 23:43:57 +0200
Le Fri, 4 May 2007 17:58:21 +0200 vous écriviez: Unfortunately ext3 doesn't support volumes bigger than 8TB, so that's useless to me. I plan to test jfs, however. I think it's more a dm/md issue, b
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00380.html (10,278 bytes)

49. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 16:20:28 -0700
CONFIG_4KSTACKS is badly named. It means you have 4K process + 4K interrupt stacks. Without this set you have just a single 8K stack for processes and interrupts. One argument for 4K+4K stacks is tha
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00381.html (15,244 bytes)

50. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 23:49:28 -0500
Emmanuel Florac wrote: Le Fri, 4 May 2007 17:58:21 +0200 vous écriviez: Did you test with ext3 as well? You wrote it crashes with ReiserFS (version 3) even faster. When it crashes with several file
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00382.html (10,862 bytes)

51. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 17:19:31 +0200
Le Fri, 4 May 2007 16:20:28 -0700 vous écriviez: That sounds very interesting, I'll give it a try monday. -- -- Emmanuel Florac www.intellique.com -
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00384.html (10,525 bytes)

52. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 17:18:20 +0200
Le Fri, 04 May 2007 23:49:28 -0500 vous écriviez: Thanks, I'll try that too. Though it won't cover all my needs (I plan to set up 50 and 150TB systems really soon). -- -- Emmanuel Florac www.intell
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00385.html (10,588 bytes)

53. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 11:47:58 -0500
Emmanuel Florac wrote: Le Fri, 04 May 2007 23:49:28 -0500 vous écriviez: Most recent kernels (2.6.19 or so IIRC) & cvs e2fsprogs (or that from rhel5/centos5) can do up to 16T ext3 filesystems, so y
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00387.html (10,996 bytes)

54. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 05 May 2007 11:50:12 -0500
Emmanuel Florac wrote: Le Fri, 4 May 2007 16:20:28 -0700 vous écriviez: You could if you have time try this and enable CONFIG_I386_IRQSTACKS but don't enable CONFIG_I386_4KSTACKS and see if that he
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00388.html (11,134 bytes)

55. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 13:35:25 -0700
I was in such a hurry I don't think I tweaked that sanely. I'll go over the patch checking that and test it later today. Is there some preferred kernel version people would like?
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00389.html (10,882 bytes)

56. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 22:56:46 +0200
Le Sat, 05 May 2007 11:47:58 -0500 vous écriviez: Sure, stay tuned! Thanks! -- -- Emmanuel Florac www.intellique.com -
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00391.html (10,537 bytes)

57. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 22:57:23 +0200
Le Sat, 05 May 2007 11:50:12 -0500 vous écriviez: Fine, I'll try that. -- -- Emmanuel Florac www.intellique.com -
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00392.html (10,938 bytes)

58. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 22:58:19 +0200
Le Sat, 5 May 2007 13:35:25 -0700 vous écriviez: Well I prefer staying away from the very latest bleeding edge, so I stick to 2.6.20.11 for now. -- -- Emmanuel Florac www.intellique.com -
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00393.html (11,119 bytes)

59. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 13:56:17 -0700
Is jfs supported by anyone right now?
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00395.html (9,423 bytes)

60. Re: XFS crash on linux raid (score: 1)
Author: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 15:12:50 -0700
diff --git a/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug b/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug index f68cc6f..908b755 100644 -- a/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug +++ b/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug @@ -56,15 +56,22 @@ config DEBUG_RODATA portion
/archives/xfs/2007-05/msg00397.html (15,318 bytes)

Current List: 41 - 60
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
This search system is powered by Namazu