Success! The bug that had been plaguing me for month is now fixed, however the load seems to be unusually high: top - 11:16:31 up 52 min, 2 users, load average: 6.85, 3.83, 2.29 Tasks: 96 total, 4 running, 92 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu0 : 0.9%us, 3.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 10.0%id, 81.7%wa, 1.3%hi, 2.6%si, 0.0%st Cpu1 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu2 : 1.7%us, 1.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 95.7%id, 1.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Cpu3 : 0.0%us, 34.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 65.1%si, 0.0%st Mem: 4057892k total, 2616856k used, 1441036k free, 1087752k buffers Swap: 2104504k total, 0k used, 2104504k free, 1112304k cached >From what I can tell, this is due to massive writes on the disk Atop: DSK | sdb | busy 188% | read 0 | write 353 | MBw/s 1.32 | avio 6.06 ms | NET | eth0 2% | pcki 6058 | pcko 7562 | si 8954 Kbps | so 25 Mbps | erro 0 | Hopefully it will settle down. Also - Is it possible to use a RAMdisk for /var/fscache? This would obviously provide 4GB of super fast caching . Greg -----Original Message----- From: linux-cachefs-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cachefs-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Howells Sent: Thursday, 1 April 2010 10:05 PM To: Greg M Cc: 'Linux filesystem caching discussion list' Subject: Re: Possible patch for CacheFiles: I/O Error: Unlink failed Greg M <gregm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've extracted the below code but get the following error after > applying to > 2.6.33(0) I'm using 2.6.34-rc3. Does using that help? > (Noting patches 1-5 are the patches you've put in the list in the last > 2 weeks). What do you mean by that? David -- Linux-cachefs mailing list Linux-cachefs@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs -- Linux-cachefs mailing list Linux-cachefs@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs
