On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 14:18 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Jonathan Dieter <jdieter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 16:19 +0100, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: > >> I'm actually quite interested in btrfs especially for servers because > >> of it's features > > > > For what it's worth, we've been running btrfs on our school fileservers > > since September. After a few teething problems (fixed by > > increasing /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes), we've had pretty much zero > > trouble. > > > > Wait what? I know we use lots o ram, but you shouldn't have to bump > min_free_kbytes. What were you seeing? Thanks, Sorry, I didn't mean to imply it was btrfs that was causing the problem. We got new servers when we did our upgrade and ran into problems with the e1000e kernel module being unable to allocate memory even though there was loads free. Bumping up min_free_kbytes fixed it. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626851 for more detail. Jonathan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
