From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id qANLVeif119868 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:31:40 -0600 Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 1p3VAZC901tFfj5Y for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 13:33:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 08:33:50 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: high load and xfsaild in d Message-ID: <20121123213350.GL32450@dastard> References: <20121123025624.GC32450@dastard> <20121123053913.GD32450@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Keith Keller Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:19:59PM -0800, Keith Keller wrote: > On 2012-11-23, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > Do whatever you want - you might be waiting a while for CentOS to > > fix it, though, because they don't fix user reported bugs. They just > > repackage whatever Red Hat releases as RHEL. > > Yes, that's why I was asking--I was wondering whether it is safe to wait > for what could be some time for a) RHEL to decide to patch (if they do > so at all), b) RHEL to patch, and c) CentOS to patch. IOW, is the high > load the only likely symptom of the originail aild patch, or are there > potentially other problems, such as performance degradation that I > haven't seen yet, that would make waiting for CentOS unwise? There is no side effect other than the load. There are not performance issues with the ailds behaving like this. > >> Do you know why I might not see this behavior on a different CentOS 6.x > >> kernel? > >> > >> Linux xxxxxx 2.6.32-279.5.2.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Aug 24 01:07:11 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > > > Because the log hang bug hadn't been fixed in that kernel. > > This actually gives me some optimism that RHEL might introduce a new > kernel sooner rather than later--that kernel wasn't all that long ago, > and there have been quite a few (mostly unrelated) patches since. Doubt it. Given that I'm the RHEL XFS maintainer.... > (That's why I was so surprised--I'm not used to the RHEL kernel moving > so quickly!) What, you're not used to having serious bugs fixed quickly? That's why people pay for RHEL... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs