-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I have encountered a strange issue in 2.6.0 and 2.6.1
I run a PGP Public key server on this machine and under 2.4.x it's
"smooth as silk". But if I boot under 2.6.x, it's gaurenteed failure. If
I try to build a database using the build command (this is an sks
server, so it's sks build or sks fastbuild) I IMMEDIATELY get Bdb
error. But the exact same command with the exact same libraries and
input files under 2.4.20 works without a hitch.
Anyone got any ideas? Anything else I can provide to assist in debugging?
- --- Dan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAAtZctwT22Jak4/4RAk+nAJ4tclsoZTI/a2LAwxb81KOrPxHLhQCcDxoP
Dlbr7aZabky+CeBGD9TnjY4=
=dr0q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:16:12 MST, Dan Egli <[email protected]> said:
> I run a PGP Public key server on this machine and under 2.4.x it's
> "smooth as silk". But if I boot under 2.6.x, it's gaurenteed failure. If
> I try to build a database using the build command (this is an sks
> server, so it's sks build or sks fastbuild) I IMMEDIATELY get Bdb
> error. But the exact same command with the exact same libraries and
> input files under 2.4.20 works without a hitch.
>
> Anyone got any ideas? Anything else I can provide to assist in debugging?
Off the top of my head, O_DIRECT horkage? I believe that 2.6 has more
stringent buffer alignment requirements. A quick 'strace' would probably show
if that's the problem.
On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 18:16, Dan Egli wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I have encountered a strange issue in 2.6.0 and 2.6.1
>
> I run a PGP Public key server on this machine and under 2.4.x it's
> "smooth as silk". But if I boot under 2.6.x, it's gaurenteed failure. If
> I try to build a database using the build command (this is an sks
> server, so it's sks build or sks fastbuild) I IMMEDIATELY get Bdb
> error. But the exact same command with the exact same libraries and
> input files under 2.4.20 works without a hitch.
>
> Anyone got any ideas? Anything else I can provide to assist in debugging?
this might be the same issue that hit some rpm versions; some versions
of db4 seem to detect the O_DIRECT header presence and starts using
O_DIRECT, without honoring the alignment requirements linux puts on
O_DIRECT usage...
Dan Egli writes:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I have encountered a strange issue in 2.6.0 and 2.6.1
>
> I run a PGP Public key server on this machine and under 2.4.x it's
> "smooth as silk". But if I boot under 2.6.x, it's gaurenteed failure. If
> I try to build a database using the build command (this is an sks
> server, so it's sks build or sks fastbuild) I IMMEDIATELY get Bdb
> error. But the exact same command with the exact same libraries and
> input files under 2.4.20 works without a hitch.
>
> Anyone got any ideas? Anything else I can provide to assist in debugging?
On top of what file system berkdb is created? I have a reminiscence that
Sleepy Cat used to have a problem with reiserfs, due to large
stat->st_blksize value. Oleg do you remember this?
>
> - --- Dan
Nikita.
Hello!
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 12:53:16PM +0300, Nikita Danilov wrote:
> > I run a PGP Public key server on this machine and under 2.4.x it's
> > "smooth as silk". But if I boot under 2.6.x, it's gaurenteed failure. If
> > I try to build a database using the build command (this is an sks
> > server, so it's sks build or sks fastbuild) I IMMEDIATELY get Bdb
> > error. But the exact same command with the exact same libraries and
> > input files under 2.4.20 works without a hitch.
> > Anyone got any ideas? Anything else I can provide to assist in debugging?
> On top of what file system berkdb is created? I have a reminiscence that
> Sleepy Cat used to have a problem with reiserfs, due to large
> stat->st_blksize value. Oleg do you remember this?
No, that problem was different. And it was believed that BErkeley DB might just
be performing a bit slower on reiserfs, though I never was able to reproduce and
Sleepycat's code contains it own limit on maximal block size (it uses 16k
blocksize if on suggested by FS is bigger that 16k).
Definitely there were no crashes.
Bye,
Oleg
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Nikita Danilov wrote:
> On top of what file system berkdb is created? I have a reminiscence that
> Sleepy Cat used to have a problem with reiserfs, due to large
> stat->st_blksize value. Oleg do you remember this?
ext3