[reiserfs] SPEC SFS fails at low loads...

[reiserfs] SPEC SFS fails at low loads...

[Tigran Aivazian]

Hi,

Under 2.4.1, after a little bit of running SPEC SFS (with NFSv3) I get
these messages on the server:

vs-13042: reiserfs_read_inode2: [0 1 0x0 SD] not found
vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found

and the run aborts.

Any clues?

Regards,
Tigran

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [reiserfs] SPEC SFS fails at low loads...

[Andi Kleen]

Tigran Aivazian <tigran@veritas.com> writes:

> Hi,
> 
> Under 2.4.1, after a little bit of running SPEC SFS (with NFSv3) I get
> these messages on the server:
> 
> vs-13042: reiserfs_read_inode2: [0 1 0x0 SD] not found
> vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> 
> and the run aborts.
> 
> Any clues?

Reiserfs really needs 64bit of inode in the NFS file handles, otherwise
this happens as soon as you run out of the file handle cache with many
active clients. The 2.2 code did a brute force search in this case (the
handles are unique in 32bit, it's just very costly to look them up without
the other 32bit), but it usually consumed so much CPU time that people 
thought the server crashed.

There are patches to do that for knfsd for both 2.2 and 2.4, but they
haven't been merged yet. It needs a small VFS enhancement and knfsd changes.

Note that stock (unpatched) unfsd also doesn't work in all cases for other
reasons, it makes assumptions about the inode space that do not work out
on a longer used reiserfs. This has also been fixed.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [reiserfs] SPEC SFS fails at low loads...

[Chris Mason]

On Wednesday, February 07, 2001 04:35:32 PM +0000 Tigran Aivazian <tigran@veritas.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Under 2.4.1, after a little bit of running SPEC SFS (with NFSv3) I get
> these messages on the server:
> 
> vs-13042: reiserfs_read_inode2: [0 1 0x0 SD] not found
> vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> 
> and the run aborts.
> 
> Any clues?

Andi covered most of the details, you can get a combined version of patches from Neil Brown and I at ftp.reiserfs.org, which I can't seem to get to right now.  If you want a copy, I can send along in private mail.

-chris




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [reiserfs] SPEC SFS fails at low loads...

[Pedro M. Rodrigues]

   Btw, GFS (http://www.sistina.com) also needs 64bit inode 
number support. They offer a patch called inode.patch that is a 
backport of the 2.4 code.


Pedro

On 8 Feb 2001, at 0:15, Andi Kleen wrote:

> Tigran Aivazian <tigran@veritas.com> writes:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Under 2.4.1, after a little bit of running SPEC SFS (with NFSv3) I
> > get these messages on the server:
> > 
> > vs-13042: reiserfs_read_inode2: [0 1 0x0 SD] not found
> > vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> > vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> > vs-13048: reiserfs_iget: bad_inode. Stat data of (0 1) not found
> > 
> > and the run aborts.
> > 
> > Any clues?
> 
> Reiserfs really needs 64bit of inode in the NFS file handles,
> otherwise this happens as soon as you run out of the file handle cache
> with many active clients. The 2.2 code did a brute force search in
> this case (the handles are unique in 32bit, it's just very costly to
> look them up without the other 32bit), but it usually consumed so much
> CPU time that people thought the server crashed.
> 
> There are patches to do that for knfsd for both 2.2 and 2.4, but they
> haven't been merged yet. It needs a small VFS enhancement and knfsd
> changes.
> 
> Note that stock (unpatched) unfsd also doesn't work in all cases for
> other reasons, it makes assumptions about the inode space that do not
> work out on a longer used reiserfs. This has also been fixed.
> 
> -Andi
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/