From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:33:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m5H7X06r028418 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:33:01 -0700 Received: from web34506.mail.mud.yahoo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with SMTP id CAFEACD2914 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web34506.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web34506.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.163.178.172]) by cuda.sgi.com with SMTP id BMytHpoKSqocM4o8 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:33:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Reply-To: MusicMan529@yahoo.com Subject: XFS mkfs/mount options MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <881489.19090.qm@web34506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: xfs@oss.sgi.com I have been doing some experiments with XFS on my "hot new desktop system," and I have turned up an interesting bit of info. (Note: My system is an AMD64 X2 2.5GHz running Linux.) When I mount an XFS volume (thus loading the xfs kernel module), the kernel spawns two CPU-bound threads for "xfslogd" and "xfsdatad". However, it appears that only one of each of these kernel processes is getting any load, as indicated by "ps ax": 3700 ? S< 0:00 [xfslogd/0] 3701 ? S< 0:19 [xfslogd/1] 3702 ? S< 0:00 [xfsdatad/0] 3703 ? D< 0:05 [xfsdatad/1] For each of these kernel threads, only those on CPU #2 are actually pulling notable load. Why is this? I understand that I may have overlooked some critical tidbit of info in the man pages, or perhaps I have not yet found something online that could explain a default limitation. If so, I would very much enjoy new information about using XFS on a desktop system. TYIA for your answer(s). -- Mark "What better place to find oneself than on the streets of one's home village?" --Capt. Jean-Luc Picard, "Family"