Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:02:23 +0100 | From | Jakob Oestergaard <> | Subject | Re: oops with dual xeon 2.8ghz 4gb ram +smp, software raid, lvm, and xfs |
| |
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 09:37:44AM -0600, Phil Dier wrote: ... > I'm building this system with stability and flexibility foremost in > mind. Am I foolish in using all of these technologies with a new-ish > version of 2.6? Is there a particular version that would be better > suited for my application? Any other suggestions you (or anyone else > on the list) could give regarding stability would be greatly appreciated.
If you'll be exporting via. NFS, it seems that there are still problems with XFS+NFS.
With SMP, what I see is that sometimes a directory might decide that it's a file - but I can't delete it, becuase it isn't 'empty' (it's still somehow a directory). Waiting a day or two, the system will change its mind back to letting the directory be a directory. Sometimes modes will be fscked up as well - a regular file can change owner, or it can change modes from '-rw-rw---' to '?---------'. Weird stuff, no way to reproduce it reliably.
With UP, I know someone who's seeing stale handles reported by the NFS server. The only known workaround is to stat the directories in question on the *server* side - a little bash with 'while true; sleep 5; ls -l /directory; do' will do the trick.
All of what I describe here are production environments - so it sucks to have that kind of problems. Some of it can be reproduced (the stale handle errors), and some of it can't.
I guess the good news would be, that I don't know of any problems with XFS+LVM+MD if you do not export the FS via. NFS :)
That is, if you run 2.6.9. Any earlier kernel will b0rk your XFS under load.
--
/ jakob
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |