Neil,
>
> No. There have been lots of changes since 2.4. Some patches might
> conceptually apply, but they would need a bit of work to make them
> actually apply.
Ok, then I won't give it a try. Thanks for the heads up.
>
> >
> > It looks like one or more of these might reduce the chances of the
> > kernel oops I experience on occasion when manipulating arrays.
>
> Would this be when removing a recently-failed device? That can still
> oops. I should send in a patch for that...
Yes in fact, that is the one I was seeing.
> These patches are about management, not performance. They won't
> affect rebuild performance at all. It is already quite good in 2.4 I
> believe. But maybe my experience is different from your.
I have an odd problem where the first rebuild performs as expected
(about 40MB/s), but any subsequent rebuild plods along at about 6-7MB/s.
There is no IO activity on the system other than the rebuild during my
tests.
I tried putting in a couple of debug printk's here and there in the code
that backs off the resync, and the printk's themselves returned the
performance back to expected levels... some kind of a timing problem
perhaps?
Sean.
--
Sean C. Kormilo, STORM Software Architect, Nortel Networks
email: skormilo@nortelnetworks.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
