From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p98MYElF071040 for ; Sat, 8 Oct 2011 17:34:14 -0500 Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 3F7E814594D2 for ; Sat, 8 Oct 2011 15:41:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 4wcvw7TvxVWQgQfR for ; Sat, 08 Oct 2011 15:41:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 09:34:04 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: Premature "No Space left on device" on XFS Message-ID: <20111008223404.GM3159@dastard> References: <4E8E079B.4040103@birkenwald.de> <20111007013711.GW3159@dastard> <4E8F0385.7060906@birkenwald.de> <20111007231410.GG3159@dastard> <4E90422E.3060805@birkenwald.de> <20111008131809.GB25855@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111008131809.GB25855@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Bernhard Schmidt , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 09:18:09AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 02:29:34PM +0200, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > > Can I avoid XFS giving ENOSPC due to inode shortage even in worst > > case situations? I would be fine preallocating 1 GB for inode > > storage if that would fix the problem. ext4 with bytes-per-inode = > > blocksize does this fine. > > It's a bit of a hack, but you can do that fairly easily by: > > - mounting the filesystem with the ikeep option > - creating the numbers of inodes you need (use a worst case allocation) > before starting the workload Just bear in mind that this can result in all inodes being allocated in the same AG, thereby serialising all future file creation and deletion in the filesystem. If you take this route, using a directory hashing scheme is, IMO, absolutely necessary. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs