Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*problems\s+with\s+xfs\s+as\s+root\s+fs\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. Re: XFS in the 2.5 kernel (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:10:46 +0200
ht, but isn't the XFS pagebuf code part of what makes it so damn fast too? -- Austin Gonyou Systems Architect, CCNA Coremetrics, Inc. Phone: 512-698-7250 email: austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx "On
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00369.html (7,952 bytes)

2. ured differently from xfs (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 May 2002 15:27:58 -0500
ossible combinations of xfs and dmapi to ones which actually compile. The following file(s) were checked into: bonnie.engr.sgi.com:/isms/slinx/2.4.x-xfs Modid: 2.4.x-xfs:slinx:119561a lin
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00371.html (8,821 bytes)

3. s (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:37:57 +0200
ecommended change to common/xlate.c, removing the first_mark_offset endian conversion. No joy: xfsrestore: restoring non-directory files xfsrestore: examining media file 8 xfsrestore: see
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00375.html (9,461 bytes)

4. ump/xfsrestore questions. (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 May 2002 16:12:46 -0500
to xfs tuning but ... Making a generic comparison between windows and xfsdump is unfair, unless you have exactly the same hardware involved. In general you need to have a feed speed abou
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00378.html (9,950 bytes)

5. blems with xfs as root fs (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:19:55 +0200
gs here then. Apparently your filesystem thinks it was not shut down cleanly; it's doing recovery. Then recovery fails, and it can't mount the root FS so you get the panic. To quote Steve
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00379.html (9,742 bytes)

6. s (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 May 2002 16:27:34 -0500
the recommended changes to restore/arch_xlate.c and see if it makes any difference. If it dosnt work, use -v5 option and put the output in a location that we could look at it to see if we
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00381.html (8,678 bytes)

7. ump/xfsrestore questions. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:03:10 +0200
the same hardware. Only difference in this case is software. Yes, that can be correct. The issue here is that both jobs are using compression, but Arcserve 2000 on NT is performing faste
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00383.html (9,099 bytes)

8. blems with xfs as root fs (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 00:32:37 +0200
n wrote: What was the exact error message that you got on the panic? Ok here come the error messages (hope without typos): [...] FAT: bogus logical sector size 0 FAT: bogus logical sector
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg00384.html (10,604 bytes)

9. uption of in-memory data" (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:10:46 +0200
all your corruption is localized to two parts of the volume, these are around the headers for allocation groups 14 and 17. I do not know if these areas will map onto the faile
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01007.html (7,952 bytes)

10. ure dmapi cannot be configured differently from xfs (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 May 2002 15:27:58 -0500
've set up an linuxfromscatch system with xfs as root fs on an promise ide raid controller (using /dev/ataraid/dXpY). I use the kernel 2.4.18 with the xfs 1.1 patch. Often aft
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01009.html (8,821 bytes)

11. case failure on 1K block fs (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:37:57 +0200
he core of the multiple blocksize support. Still some open issues in O_DIRECT, but this was a corruption case during random I/O. Filesystems with blocksize == pagesize were no
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01013.html (9,461 bytes)

12. estore questions. (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 May 2002 16:12:46 -0500
ta to a DDS3 DAT. It took about 4 hours with On a windows box, with the same TBU, I can dump the same amount in about 1.5 hrs. Can anyone suggest what I can do to speed things
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01016.html (9,950 bytes)

13. restore questions. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:19:55 +0200
ng but ... Making a generic comparison between windows and xfsdump is unfair, unless you have exactly the same hardware involved. In general you need to have a feed speed abou
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01017.html (9,742 bytes)

14. roblems with xfs as root fs (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 May 2002 16:27:34 -0500
two things here then. Apparently your filesystem thinks it was not shut down cleanly; it's doing recovery. Then recovery fails, and it can't mount the root FS so you get the p
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01019.html (8,678 bytes)

15. th xfs as root fs (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:03:10 +0200
we
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01021.html (9,099 bytes)

16. restore questions. (score: 1)
Author: Michael Wahlbrink <x_miw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 00:32:37 +0200
ardware. Only difference in this case is software. Yes, that can be correct. The issue here is that both jobs are using compression, but Arcserve 2000 on NT is performing faste
/archives/xfs/2002-05/msg01022.html (10,604 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu