From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Manuel Krause Subject: Re: [PATCH CFT] tons of logging patches Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 23:13:31 +0200 Message-ID: <3CFE7EFB.6080203@mb.tu-ilmenau.de> References: <1023076301.22608.1778.camel@tiny> <3CFC1CB5.8040102@mb.tu-ilmenau.de> <1023157228.31475.38.camel@tiny> <3CFC33F2.7080009@mb.tu-ilmenau.de> <1023196345.31682.81.camel@tiny> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Chris Mason Cc: reiserfs-list On 06/04/2002 03:12 PM, Chris Mason wrote: > On Mon, 2002-06-03 at 23:28, Manuel Krause wrote: > > >>So, VMware is stable with it, too, on my well known "heavy-private-test" >>of it (running Norton SpeedDisk at least twice within a most recent >>VMware Win98). It doesn't show greatly different timings than to my >>setup before though having a different disk i/o pattern (due to the >>missing aa patches)... and me having a reduced RAM from 512to256MB at >>the moment. And I should be honest to say I can't give exact timings as >>the important disk contents changed during last weeks. But the >>disk-access-times/related-to-the-content are definitively _not_ higher >>than before! > > > same speed on 1/2 the ram isn't bad ;-) > [...] Don't know where to reply best... Hi, again! I want to make some more comments on my latest words. As I said I first used the data=journal mode and got nice timings. O.k. I really think after that "revision" my previous kernel setup wasn't that well configured as I thought and felt. Long time degression?! I really had the reiserfs messages in my logs that it explicitely used this mode. The only problem I obviously had, so far, was to distinguish the mount options at darkest night: data=logging is no mount-option but the description "data-logging", the mount option for it is data=journal -- Passing rootflags=data=journal in lilo.conf and data=logging in fstab results in an uncontrollable kernel ;-) Huh! Sorry, for my thoughtless testing. But my posted timings are quite relieble on here. Concerning VMware the "same speed on 1/2 RAM" results are even more impressing as VMware seems to buffer it's memory contents to /tmp/... fs again since I reduced the RAM. With 512MB it didn't seem to need this method usually. The data=ordered mode saves 1..2secs from of my previously posted load times for NS7 and OOo-1.0 and seems to be stable itself in "everydays usage" and for my VMware sessions, too. I didn't test the "crash->no-garbage-in-files" case and the more recent 03-beta-data-logging-6.diff, yet. I was extraordinary glad to see the explicit wording of the mounted partition in the logs we missed for so long time! Thanks for your help, Manuel