Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Linux: Kernel

the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page Last page  View All Linux kernel RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


reiser at namesys

Jul 27, 2006, 7:25 PM

Post #126 of 223 (9546 views)
Permalink
Re: the ' 'official' point of view' expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Adrian Bunk wrote:

>
>
>But you can not tell based on klive data whether the ratio of
>reiser4:ext3 users in the world is more like 1:5, 1:500 or 1:50000.
>
><-- snip -->
>
>I can't prove that the 1:5 ratio is wrong, but the point is that
>claiming a 1:5 ratio was true based on the klive data is not better than
>claiming it based on no data.
>
Yes, but I have been surprised that linux conference attendees all know
about reiser4, so I think it is consistent with the notion that reiser4
usage may well be much much higher than one would expect of a filesystem
that is not in the main tree, and which requires a lot of hassle to
install. It is a datapoint. I think the level of hobbyist enthusiasm
seen suggests that distros may gain market advantage by adding reiser4
support.....

Hans
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


reiser at namesys

Jul 27, 2006, 7:25 PM

Post #127 of 223 (9553 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Adrian and Andrea, you both write a lot of useful patches, so let's
remember that, and try to all get along.....

Hans
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


reiser at namesys

Jul 27, 2006, 7:26 PM

Post #128 of 223 (9533 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Jeff Garzik wrote:

>
> Actually, there is reiser4 brokenness lurking in Hans' statement, too:

Where! Someone tell me!;-)

>
> A filesystem WITH plugins must still handle the standard Linux
> compatibility stuff that other filesystems handle.

Hmm, you mean we should first implement regular unix file plugins before
implementing enhanced functionality ones? Are you aware that reiser4
plugins are per file, and thus if a user selects a plugin that is not
the default, and which has user visible semantic differences, it means
they said they want non-standard behavior?

>
> Plugins --do not-- mean that you can just change the filesystem format
> willy-nilly, with zero impact.

Yes they do.....

>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


reiser at namesys

Jul 27, 2006, 7:40 PM

Post #129 of 223 (9539 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Matthias Andree wrote:

>I wonder what makes the hash overflow issue so complicated (other than
>differing business plans, that is) that upgrading in place isn't
>possible. Changes introduce instability, but namesys were proud of their
>regression testing - so how sustainable is their internal test suite?
>
>
>
Never met a test suite the equal of a few million users.....

People have this image of Namesys as some large corporation that has
large resources. We just barely are going to be able to ship reiser4,
at the cost of a LOT of financial pain. We can't afford to go in two
directions at once. We can add bugfixes to V3, but adding features, I
have to tell you that we ain't got the staff for both that and shipping
V4. Our whole corporation has a budget about what most corporations
spend on two programmers. We have 5 developers, including me, and
making little bits of money is a constant distraction from the main work.

Hans
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


bunk at stusta

Jul 28, 2006, 3:01 AM

Post #130 of 223 (9526 views)
Permalink
Re: the ' 'official' point of view' expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 08:25:23PM -0600, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >But you can not tell based on klive data whether the ratio of
> >reiser4:ext3 users in the world is more like 1:5, 1:500 or 1:50000.
> >
> ><-- snip -->
> >
> >I can't prove that the 1:5 ratio is wrong, but the point is that
> >claiming a 1:5 ratio was true based on the klive data is not better than
> >claiming it based on no data.
> >
> Yes, but I have been surprised that linux conference attendees all know
> about reiser4, so I think it is consistent with the notion that reiser4
> usage may well be much much higher than one would expect of a filesystem
> that is not in the main tree,
>...

There were already several long flamewars^Wdiscussions about reiser4 on
linux-kernel.

There has already been some amount of press articles covering reiser4.

But how much usage is the result of this?

There seem to be the the following possibilities how users get reiser4
into their kernel today:
1. -mm kernel
2. non -mm kernel
a) patch downloaded from namesys.com
b) through their distribution
- in a kernel image
- as patch
c) patch forwarded through other channels

2b) seems to be the only number that is easily measurable.
Do you have some download statistics for namesys.com?

Multiplying the downloads for the 2.6.16 patches with 10 seems to be the
best estimate for the order of magnitude of current reiser4 users that
seems to be available.

> Hans

cu
Adrian

--

"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


vonbrand at inf

Jul 28, 2006, 7:05 AM

Post #131 of 223 (9552 views)
Permalink
Re: the ' 'official' point of view' expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Hans Reiser <reiser [at] namesys> wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:

> >But you can not tell based on klive data whether the ratio of
> >reiser4:ext3 users in the world is more like 1:5, 1:500 or 1:50000.
> >
> ><-- snip -->
> >
> >I can't prove that the 1:5 ratio is wrong, but the point is that
> >claiming a 1:5 ratio was true based on the klive data is not better than
> >claiming it based on no data.

> Yes, but I have been surprised that linux conference attendees all know
> about reiser4, so I think it is consistent with the notion that reiser4
> usage may well be much much higher than one would expect of a filesystem
> that is not in the main tree, and which requires a lot of hassle to
> install. It is a datapoint. I think the level of hobbyist enthusiasm
> seen suggests that distros may gain market advantage by adding reiser4
> support.....

Great! Then /sit down and do the work to get it into the vanilla
kernel/. You know then it is not a wasted effort... and you /do/ know by
now (or should) that playing the "politics"/"whining" card goes nowhere.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


andrea at cpushare

Jul 28, 2006, 7:31 AM

Post #132 of 223 (9535 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

> remember that, and try to all get along.....

FWIW the last thing I can be interested about is to get along with
somebody that gratuitously attacks me every time he can.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


reiser4 at blinkenlights

Jul 31, 2006, 3:58 AM

Post #133 of 223 (9538 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

> > And EXT3 imposes practical limits that ReiserFS doesn't as well. The big
> > one being a fixed number of inodes that can't be adjusted on the fly,
>
> Right. Plan ahead.

Ok: Assume that i've read the mke2fs manpage and added more inodes to
my filesystem.

So: What happens if i need to grow my filesystem by 200% after 1-2
years? Can i add more inodes to Ext3 on-the-fly ?

A filesystem with a fixed number of inodes (= not readjustable while
mounted) is ehr.. somewhat unuseable for a lot of people with
big and *flexible* storage needs (Talking about NetApp/EMC owners)

Why are a lot of Solaris-people using (buying) VxFS? Maybe because UFS
also has such silly limitations? (..and performs awkward with trillions
of files..?..)


Ext3 may be a fine and stable Filesystem and works well for a lot of
people. But there are also a lot of people who need 'something' better
like: VxFS, WAFL and Reiser4.

Btw: Do you know Adics 'StorNext Filesystem' ?
IMHO Ext3 will never be able to do such things...
But with Reiser4.. .. if someone wrote a plugin .. ;-)



Regards,
Adrian

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


matthias.andree at gmx

Jul 31, 2006, 7:47 AM

Post #134 of 223 (9536 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Adrian Ulrich schrieb am 2006-07-31:

> > > And EXT3 imposes practical limits that ReiserFS doesn't as well. The big
> > > one being a fixed number of inodes that can't be adjusted on the fly,
> >
> > Right. Plan ahead.
>
> Ok: Assume that i've read the mke2fs manpage and added more inodes to
> my filesystem.
>
> So: What happens if i need to grow my filesystem by 200% after 1-2
> years? Can i add more inodes to Ext3 on-the-fly ?

Since you "grow", you'll be using resize2fs (or growfs or mkfs -G for
UFS). resize2fs and the other tools do exactly that: add inodes - and
you could easily have told this either from reading the resize2fs code
or just trying it on a temp file:

-- create file system
dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/foo bs=1k count=50000
/sbin/mke2fs -F -j /tmp/foo

-- check no. of inodes
/sbin/tune2fs -l /tmp/foo | grep -i inode | head -2
# Inode count: 12544
# Free inodes: 12533

-- resize
/sbin/e2fsck -f /tmp/foo
dd if=/dev/zero bs=1k count=50000 >>/tmp/foo
/sbin/resize2fs /tmp/foo

-- check no. of inodes
/sbin/tune2fs -l /tmp/foo | grep -i inode
# Inode count: 23296
# Free inodes: 23285

Trying the same after mke2fs -b 1024 -i 1024 shows that the inode
density will continue to be respected.

FreeBSD 6.1's growfs(8) increases the number of inodes. This is
documented to work since 4.4.

Solaris 8's mkfs -G also increases the number of inodes and apparently
also works for mounted file systems.

This looks rather like an education issue rather than a technical limit.

> A filesystem with a fixed number of inodes (= not readjustable while
> mounted) is ehr.. somewhat unuseable for a lot of people with
> big and *flexible* storage needs (Talking about NetApp/EMC owners)

Which is untrue at least for Solaris, which allows resizing a life file
system. FreeBSD and Linux require an unmount.

> Why are a lot of Solaris-people using (buying) VxFS? Maybe because UFS
> also has such silly limitations? (..and performs awkward with trillions
> of files..?..)

Well, such "silly limitations"... looks like they are mostly hot air
spewn by marketroids that need to justify people spending money on their
new filesystem.

The only problem remains if you grossly overestimate the average file
size and with it underestimate the number of inodes needed. But even
then, I'd be interested to know if that's a real problem for systems
such as ZFS.

--
Matthias Andree
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


reiser4 at blinkenlights

Jul 31, 2006, 8:59 AM

Post #135 of 223 (9534 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Hello Matthias,

> This looks rather like an education issue rather than a technical limit.

We aren't talking about the same issue: I was asking to do it
on-the-fly. Umounting the filesystem, running e2fsck and resize2fs
is something different ;-)

> Which is untrue at least for Solaris, which allows resizing a life file
> system. FreeBSD and Linux require an unmount.

Correct: You can add more inodes to a Solaris UFS on-the-fly if you are
lucky enough to have some free space available.

A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
big deal with VxFS because such a problem is fixable within seconds.
What would have happened if he had used UFS? mkfs -G wouldn't work
because he had no additional Diskspace left... *ouch*..

> Well, such "silly limitations"... looks like they are mostly hot air
> spewn by marketroids that need to justify people spending money on their
> new filesystem.

Have you ever seen VxFS or WAFL in action?


> But even then, I'd be interested to know if that's a real problem for systems
> such as ZFS.

ZFS uses 'dnodes'. The dnodes are allocated on demand from your
available space so running out of [di]nodes is impossible.

Great to see that Sun ships a state-of-the-art Filesystem with
Solaris... I think linux should do the same...

Regards,
Adrian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


jbglaw at lug-owl

Jul 31, 2006, 9:22 AM

Post #136 of 223 (9527 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a

So preparation work wasn't done.

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw [at] lug-owl +49-172-7608481
Signature of: Ich hatte in letzter Zeit ein bisschen viel Realitycheck.
the second : Langsam möchte ich mal wieder weiterträumen können.
Attachments: signature.asc (0.18 KB)


ninja at slaphack

Jul 31, 2006, 9:44 AM

Post #137 of 223 (9540 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
>> A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
>> to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
>> to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
>
> So preparation work wasn't done.

So what?

Yes, you need to do preparation. But it is really nice if the
filesystem can do that work for you.

Let me put it this way -- You're back in college, and it's time to write
a thesis. You have a choice of software packages:



Package A: You have to specify how many pages, and how many words,
you're likely to use before you start typing. Guess too high, and
you'll print out a bunch of blank pages at the end. Guess too low, and
you'll run out of space and have to start over, copy and paste your
document back in, and hope it gets all the formatting right, which it
probably won't.

Package B: Your document grows as you type. When it's time to print,
only the pages you've actually written something on -- but all of the
pages you've actually written something on -- are printed.



All other things being equal, which would you choose? Which one seems
more modern?

Look, I understand the argument against ReiserFS v3 -- it has another
limitation that you don't even know about. That other limitation is
scary -- that's like being able to type as many words as you want, but
once you type enough pages (no way of knowing how many), pages start
randomly disappearing from the middle of your document.

But the argument that no one cares about inode limits? Really, stop
kidding yourselves. It's 2006. The limits are starting to look
ridiculous. Just because they're workable doesn't mean we should have
to live with them.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


rudy at edsons

Jul 31, 2006, 9:44 AM

Post #138 of 223 (9526 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:

> On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
>> A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
>> to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
>> to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
>
> So preparation work wasn't done.
>
> MfG, JBG

Of course you are right. Preparation work was not fully done. And using
ext1 would also have been possible. I suspect you are still using ext1,
cause with proper preparation it is perfectly usable.

Cheers,

Rudy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


doglesby at teleformix

Jul 31, 2006, 9:47 AM

Post #139 of 223 (9521 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 18:22 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
>
> So preparation work wasn't done.
>
> MfG, JBG
>

I'd agree with that statement. The wrong filesystem was chosen at the
beginning of the project.

As someone who is currently planning to migrate ~100GB of stored mail to
the Maildirs format, it was pretty clear early on that EXT3 would not
cut it (from past and current experiences), and not just for the sake of
calculating inodes.

--Dan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


ninja at slaphack

Jul 31, 2006, 9:52 AM

Post #140 of 223 (9521 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Matthias Andree wrote:
> Adrian Ulrich schrieb am 2006-07-31:

>> Why are a lot of Solaris-people using (buying) VxFS? Maybe because UFS
>> also has such silly limitations? (..and performs awkward with trillions
>> of files..?..)
>
> Well, such "silly limitations"... looks like they are mostly hot air
> spewn by marketroids that need to justify people spending money on their
> new filesystem.

I think the limitations are silly, and I'm not paid to say this.
Besides, we're talking about a filesystem that will be free (and libre),
so I don't see the point of marketroids, certainly not in this context.

But let's not stoop to name-calling.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


matthias.andree at gmx

Jul 31, 2006, 9:54 AM

Post #141 of 223 (9509 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

(resending complete message to the list).

Adrian Ulrich schrieb am 2006-07-31:

> Hello Matthias,
>
> > This looks rather like an education issue rather than a technical limit.
>
> We aren't talking about the same issue: I was asking to do it
> on-the-fly. Umounting the filesystem, running e2fsck and resize2fs
> is something different ;-)

There was stuff by Andreas Dilger, to support "online" resizing of
mounted ext2 file systems. I never cared to look for this (does it
support ext3, does it work with current kernels, merge status) since
offline resizing was always sufficient for me.

> A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes;

Well - easy to fix, newfs again with proper inode density (perhaps 1 per
2 kB) and redo the migration. Of course you're free to pay for a new
file system if your fellow admin can't be bothered to remember newfs's
-i option.

> > Well, such "silly limitations"... looks like they are mostly hot air
> > spewn by marketroids that need to justify people spending money on their
> > new filesystem.
>
> Have you ever seen VxFS or WAFL in action?

No I haven't. As long as they are commercial, it's not likely that I
will.

> Great to see that Sun ships a state-of-the-art Filesystem with
> Solaris... I think linux should do the same...

I think reallocating inodes for UFS and/or ext2/ext3 is possible, even
online, but someone needs to write, debug and field-test the code to do
that - possibly based on Andreas Dilger's earlier ext2 online resizing
work.

--
Matthias Andree
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


jbglaw at lug-owl

Jul 31, 2006, 10:16 AM

Post #142 of 223 (9525 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 11:47:00 -0500, Dan Oglesby <doglesby [at] teleformix> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 18:22 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> > So preparation work wasn't done.
>
> As someone who is currently planning to migrate ~100GB of stored mail to
> the Maildirs format, it was pretty clear early on that EXT3 would not
> cut it (from past and current experiences), and not just for the sake of
> calculating inodes.

Uh? Where did you face a problem there?

With maildir, you shouldn't face any problems IMO. Even users with
zillions of mails should work properly with the dir_index stuff:

tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/hdXX

or alternatively (to start that for already existing directories):

e2fsck -fD /dev/hdXX


Of course, you'll always face a problem with lots of files in one
directory at getdents() time (eg. opendir()/readdir()/closedir()), but
this is a common limit for all filesystems.

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw [at] lug-owl +49-172-7608481
Signature of: Alles wird gut! ...und heute wirds schon ein bißchen besser.
the second :
Attachments: signature.asc (0.18 KB)


jbglaw at lug-owl

Jul 31, 2006, 10:20 AM

Post #143 of 223 (9531 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 18:44:33 +0200, Rudy Zijlstra <rudy [at] edsons> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich
> > <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> >
> > So preparation work wasn't done.
>
> Of course you are right. Preparation work was not fully done. And using
> ext1 would also have been possible. I suspect you are still using ext1,
> cause with proper preparation it is perfectly usable.

Nope, I'm a quite happy ext3 user for quite divergent workloads.
Starting with storing loads of small files in a hugh number of
directories (mkfs -T news) over hugh numbers of files in few
directories (mkfs -O dir_index) to only a small number of really hugh
files (mkfs -T largefile4).

All that I still need to catch up with is 4TB sized files. But I guess
this is really an uncommon workload, but ISTR that somebody even works
on this.

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw [at] lug-owl +49-172-7608481
Signature of: Don't believe in miracles: Rely on them!
the second :
Attachments: signature.asc (0.18 KB)


jbglaw at lug-owl

Jul 31, 2006, 10:32 AM

Post #144 of 223 (9534 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 18:44:33 +0200, Rudy Zijlstra <rudy [at] edsons> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich
> > <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> >
> > So preparation work wasn't done.
>
> Of course you are right. Preparation work was not fully done. And using
> ext1 would also have been possible. I suspect you are still using ext1,
> cause with proper preparation it is perfectly usable.

Oh, and before people start laughing at me, here are some personal or
friend's experiences with different filesystems:

* reiser3: A HDD containing a reiser3 filesystem was tried to be
booted on a machine that fucked up DMA writes. Fortunately, it
crashed really soon (right after going for read-write.) After
rebooting the HDD on a sane PeeCee, it refused to boot. Starting
off some rescue system showed an _empty_ root filesystem.

* A friend's XFS data partition (portable USB/FireWire HDD) once
crashed due to being hot-unplugged off the USB. The in-kernel XFS
driver refused to mount that thing again, and the tools also
refused to fix any errors. (Don't ask, no details at my hands...)

* JFS just always worked for me. Though I've never ever had a broken
HDD where it (or it's tools) could have shown how well-done they
were, so from a crash-recovery point of view, it's untested.

* Being a regular ext3 user, I had lots of broken HDDs containing
ext3 filesystems. For every single case, it has been easy fixing
the filesystem after cloning. Just _once_, fsck wasn't able to fix
something, so I did it manually with some disk editor. This worked
well because the on-disk data structures are actually as simple as
they are.

ext3 always worked well for me, so why should I abandon it?

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw [at] lug-owl +49-172-7608481
Signature of: If it doesn't work, force it.
the second : If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.
Attachments: signature.asc (0.18 KB)


matthias.andree at gmx

Jul 31, 2006, 10:34 AM

Post #145 of 223 (9515 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Jan-Benedict Glaw schrieb am 2006-07-31:

> Uh? Where did you face a problem there?
>
> With maildir, you shouldn't face any problems IMO. Even users with
> zillions of mails should work properly with the dir_index stuff:
>
> tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/hdXX
>
> or alternatively (to start that for already existing directories):
>
> e2fsck -fD /dev/hdXX

hat is not "alternatively", but "tune2fs first", then "e2fsck -fD"
(which can't happen on a RW-mounted FS and you should only try this on
your rootfs if you can reboot with magic sysrq or from a rescue system).

--
Matthias Andree
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


be-news06 at lina

Jul 31, 2006, 10:34 AM

Post #146 of 223 (9516 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

David Masover <ninja [at] slaphack> wrote:
> Yes, you need to do preparation. But it is really nice if the
> filesystem can do that work for you.

The filesystem defaults are more than useable for most situations. You
simply dont migrate a filesystem of that size without doing some
calculation.

Gruss
Bernd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


doglesby at teleformix

Jul 31, 2006, 10:44 AM

Post #147 of 223 (9597 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 19:16 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 11:47:00 -0500, Dan Oglesby <doglesby [at] teleformix> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 18:22 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> > > So preparation work wasn't done.
> >
> > As someone who is currently planning to migrate ~100GB of stored mail to
> > the Maildirs format, it was pretty clear early on that EXT3 would not
> > cut it (from past and current experiences), and not just for the sake of
> > calculating inodes.
>
> Uh? Where did you face a problem there?
>

Past experiences dealing with systems that generate several thousand to
tens of thousands of files a day, adding up to well in the millions over
the course of normal production (this is not for a mail server, BTW).
Once we got close to a million files, filesystem transactions started
bogging the system, driving the load over 50. Simply switching to
ReiserFS v3 allowed us to go well past the number of files EXT3 could
handle reasonably and the max load stayed right around the number of
CPUs the system contained (typically 8).

There is a LOT going on with these systems, not just filesystem
transactions. EXT3 does not do well in our environment at all.

> With maildir, you shouldn't face any problems IMO. Even users with
> zillions of mails should work properly with the dir_index stuff:
>
> tune2fs -O dir_index /dev/hdXX
>
> or alternatively (to start that for already existing directories):
>
> e2fsck -fD /dev/hdXX
>
>

I've been tuning EXT3 to see what performance I can get for the mail
server, and it's just not there compared to ReiserFS with minimal
tuning.

> Of course, you'll always face a problem with lots of files in one
> directory at getdents() time (eg. opendir()/readdir()/closedir()), but
> this is a common limit for all filesystems.
>
> MfG, JBG
>

Of course, but the issue is EXT3 does this a whole lot worse than
ReiserFS v3 from my experiences.

At any rate, that's about all I have to say about this issue. I'll be
patiently waiting to see ReiserFS v4 included in the main kernel, so I
have less hoops to jump through to implement the latest and greatest
from Namesys.

--Dan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


doglesby at teleformix

Jul 31, 2006, 10:46 AM

Post #148 of 223 (9547 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 19:32 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 18:44:33 +0200, Rudy Zijlstra <rudy [at] edsons> wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich
> > > <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> > >
> > > So preparation work wasn't done.
> >
> > Of course you are right. Preparation work was not fully done. And using
> > ext1 would also have been possible. I suspect you are still using ext1,
> > cause with proper preparation it is perfectly usable.
>
> Oh, and before people start laughing at me, here are some personal or
> friend's experiences with different filesystems:
>
> * reiser3: A HDD containing a reiser3 filesystem was tried to be
> booted on a machine that fucked up DMA writes. Fortunately, it
> crashed really soon (right after going for read-write.) After
> rebooting the HDD on a sane PeeCee, it refused to boot. Starting
> off some rescue system showed an _empty_ root filesystem.
>
> * A friend's XFS data partition (portable USB/FireWire HDD) once
> crashed due to being hot-unplugged off the USB. The in-kernel XFS
> driver refused to mount that thing again, and the tools also
> refused to fix any errors. (Don't ask, no details at my hands...)
>
> * JFS just always worked for me. Though I've never ever had a broken
> HDD where it (or it's tools) could have shown how well-done they
> were, so from a crash-recovery point of view, it's untested.
>
> * Being a regular ext3 user, I had lots of broken HDDs containing
> ext3 filesystems. For every single case, it has been easy fixing
> the filesystem after cloning. Just _once_, fsck wasn't able to fix
> something, so I did it manually with some disk editor. This worked
> well because the on-disk data structures are actually as simple as
> they are.
>
> ext3 always worked well for me, so why should I abandon it?
>
> MfG, JBG

I've lost EXT2 and EXT3 filesystems from machines with no bad hardware
(power loss during writes).

I've recovered all but a handful of files from a RAID-5 array running
ReiserFS v3 that had two drives fail in rapid succession with bad
sectors.

Sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.

--Dan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


reiser4 at blinkenlights

Jul 31, 2006, 10:56 AM

Post #149 of 223 (9523 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

> Well - easy to fix, newfs again with proper inode density (perhaps 1 per
> 2 kB) and redo the migration.

Ehr: Such a migration (on a very busy system) takes *some* time (weeks).
Re-Doing (migrate users back / recreate the FS / start again) the whole
thing isn't really an option..


> Of course you're free to pay for a new
> file system if your fellow admin can't be bothered to remember newfs's
> -i option.

Let's face it: Shit happens and nobody is perfect. A filesystem should
be flexible (modern..) and support Admin/User-needs.

We wouldn't need ECC / Raid / UPS's in a perfect world.


> > Have you ever seen VxFS or WAFL in action?
>
> No I haven't. As long as they are commercial, it's not likely that I
> will.

Why?

NetApp WAFL-Blurb:
http://www.netapp.com/library/tr/3002.pdf


Maybe we should crop the Cc: list .. this is getting OT.

-- Adrian

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/


matthias.andree at gmx

Jul 31, 2006, 11:11 AM

Post #150 of 223 (9523 views)
Permalink
Re: the " 'official' point of view" expressed by kernelnewbies.org regarding reiser4 inclusion [In reply to]

Jan-Benedict Glaw schrieb am 2006-07-31:

> On Mon, 2006-07-31 18:44:33 +0200, Rudy Zijlstra <rudy [at] edsons> wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jul 2006, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-07-31 17:59:58 +0200, Adrian Ulrich
> > > <reiser4 [at] blinkenlights> wrote:
> > > > A colleague of mine happened to create a ~300gb filesystem and started
> > > > to migrate Mailboxes (Maildir-style format = many small files (1-3kb))
> > > > to the new LUN. At about 70% the filesystem ran out of inodes; Not a
> > >
> > > So preparation work wasn't done.
> >
> > Of course you are right. Preparation work was not fully done. And using
> > ext1 would also have been possible. I suspect you are still using ext1,
> > cause with proper preparation it is perfectly usable.
>
> Oh, and before people start laughing at me, here are some personal or
> friend's experiences with different filesystems:
>
> * reiser3: A HDD containing a reiser3 filesystem was tried to be
> booted on a machine that fucked up DMA writes. Fortunately, it
> crashed really soon (right after going for read-write.) After
> rebooting the HDD on a sane PeeCee, it refused to boot. Starting
> off some rescue system showed an _empty_ root filesystem.

Massive hardware problems don't count. ext2/ext3 doesn't look much better in
such cases. I had a machine with RAM gone bad (no ECC - I wonder what
idiot ordered a machine without ECC for a server, but anyways) and it
fucked up every 64th bit - only in a certain region. Guess what happened
to the fs when it went into e2fsck after a reboot. Boom. Same with a
dead DPTA that lost every 16th block or so, the rescue in the first case
was swapping the RAM and "amrecover" and in the second swapping the
drive and "dsmc restore". OTOH, kernel panics on bad blocks are a no-no
of course.

> * A friend's XFS data partition (portable USB/FireWire HDD) once
> crashed due to being hot-unplugged off the USB. The in-kernel XFS
> driver refused to mount that thing again, and the tools also
> refused to fix any errors. (Don't ask, no details at my hands...)

Don't use write caches then. (Though I've seen NUL-filled blocks in new
files or appended to files after in 2001 or 2002.)

> * JFS just always worked for me. Though I've never ever had a broken
> HDD where it (or it's tools) could have shown how well-done they
> were, so from a crash-recovery point of view, it's untested.

SUSE removed JFS support from their installation tool for "technical
reasons" they didn't specify in the release notes. Whatever.

> ext3 always worked well for me, so why should I abandon it?

Plus, it and its tools are maintained.

--
Matthias Andree
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo [at] vger
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page Last page  View All Linux kernel RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.