Hello,
I set up a new raid system with about 500gib space and put reiserfs on it. It
takes some seconds to mount so I patched my 2.6.17.8-tree with those
reiserfs-patches from -mm. Mount time was reduced significantly (less than a
second).
What I found out about these patches is that they can introduce instability,
but that seemed a bit vague to me.
Up to now I didn't encounter any problems, so are there (theoretical?)
problems with the on-demand code? Could that stuff go into mainline?
Maybe there are tests I could run, the data on that box is easily
recoverable ...
Regards
--
---------------------------------------
Malte Schr?der
[email protected]
ICQ# 68121508
---------------------------------------
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:58:38 +0200
Malte Schr__der <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello,
> I set up a new raid system with about 500gib space and put reiserfs on it. It
> takes some seconds to mount so I patched my 2.6.17.8-tree with those
> reiserfs-patches from -mm. Mount time was reduced significantly (less than a
> second).
> What I found out about these patches is that they can introduce instability,
> but that seemed a bit vague to me.
The first version of the patches was (terribly) buggy. The version in
current -mm has no known (to me) shortcomings.
> Up to now I didn't encounter any problems, so are there (theoretical?)
> problems with the on-demand code? Could that stuff go into mainline?
Expect to see it in 2.6.19-rc1.
> Maybe there are tests I could run, the data on that box is easily
> recoverable ...
Yup, please run tests - anything and everything.
Be sure to run reiserfsck before the testing to make sure the fs is clean,
then run it again at the end of testing, see if anything ended up out of
place.
On Thursday 17 August 2006 00:21, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:58:38 +0200
> > Maybe there are tests I could run, the data on that box is easily
> > recoverable ...
>
> Yup, please run tests - anything and everything.
I did some benchmarking and other stuff (creating files, moving files around
and stuff like this) to try to stress the fs a bit and simply put it to my
everyday usage. Nothing unusual showed up.
>
> Be sure to run reiserfsck before the testing to make sure the fs is clean,
> then run it again at the end of testing, see if anything ended up out of
> place.
I did.
--
---------------------------------------
Malte Schr?der
[email protected]
ICQ# 68121508
---------------------------------------