From: Steven Pratt <slpratt@austin.ibm.com>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: New experimental btrfs branch ready for testing
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:02:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A294194.6050006@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090605142008.GB6942@think>
Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 02:02:20PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote:
>
>> Chris Mason wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> Yan Zheng has been doing some major surgery to the back references and
>>> extent allocation code, tackling bottlenecks in the code that tracks
>>> extents. It scales better with many snapshots and performs better in
>>> the common case of no snapshots at all.
>>>
>>> THE NEW CODE IS A FORWARD ROLLING DISK FORMAT CHANGE. This means it is
>>> compatible with the current btrfs disk format, but once you mount a
>>> filesystem with the new code, it WILL NO LONGER BE MOUNTABLE FROM OLD
>>> KERNELS. Old kernels spit out an error message when you try them on new
>>> format filesystems.
>>>
>>> This is a large change, and I'm hoping to have it stable in time for the
>>> 2.6.31 merge window. I've been testing it for about a week now, and
>>> haven't been able to cause major problems yet. But, testing the
>>> compatibility with old format filesystems is the hard part, and
>>> everyone that pulls the new code should backup their data first.
>>>
>>> I've setup git branches called newformat where you can pull the new code.
>>>
>>> For the kernel (based on 2.6.30-rc7):
>>>
>>> git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.git newformat
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> So I started the performance runs on this. The base tests completed fine
>> on the raid system and I will post results as soon as I can finish
>> postprocessing, but when I tried to do nodatacow that machine it crashed
>> pretty early. Here is console log:
>>
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> Thanks again for hammering on these. Yan Zheng and I have both been
> trying to reproduce problems with nodatacow and with the database random
> write run.
>
So now that the raid machine is actually up, I discovered it got further
than I thought on nodatacow. It did all the read tests, but appeared to
died on 16 thread random write(not odirect). There were no messages
logged to var/log/messages at all. Last I saw was :
Jun 4 03:14:24 btrfs1 kernel: [65856.065491] btrfs: setting nodatacow
Jun 4 15:24:45 btrfs1 syslogd 1.4.1: restart.
Just dead until we rebooted machine later that day.
> But, so far we haven't been able to trigger any crashes. Do you see
> anything in your config or setup that is unusual?
>
No, other than using the old mkfs with the new format. I've kicked off
new runs to see if I hit the same issues
Steve
> -chris
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-05 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-01 21:04 New experimental btrfs branch ready for testing Chris Mason
2009-06-02 13:28 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-03 17:08 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-04 19:02 ` Steven Pratt
2009-06-04 19:05 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-05 14:20 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-05 16:02 ` Steven Pratt [this message]
2009-06-05 21:27 ` Steven Pratt
2009-06-06 0:20 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-06 16:38 ` Steven Pratt
2009-06-09 15:26 ` Chris Mason
2009-06-15 15:46 ` Steven Pratt
2009-06-07 11:50 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2009-06-07 12:13 ` Daniel Cordero
2009-06-08 12:33 ` Yan Zheng
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A294194.6050006@austin.ibm.com \
--to=slpratt@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox