xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: fc3 and stacks

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: fc3 and stacks
From: Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:53:27 -0600
Cc: Robin Humble <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4231D589.30106@sgi.com>
References: <20050310232036.GA19295@lemming.cita.utoronto.ca> <4231D589.30106@sgi.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127)
Eric Sandeen wrote:


There are still a few large stack users in xfs even when it's used by itself - one that comes to mind is code that runs when you use xfs_fsr (hm, I really must check in my fix for that....) And figuring out callchain depth is tricky, so hard to say how these things will all add up.

I guess I would suggest that you just test it out on one non-critical box, with a "normal" workload for you, and see how it fares. It's tight, but in many cases it might be just fine.

I used default fedora core 3 kernels on my xfs only laptop for a quite a while without problems. I went to building my own kernels only because I ended up with a wireless card which requires one of those darn windows only drivers, and windows drivers appear to eat stack space for breakfast.


If so, then it's not hard to recompile the fc3 kernel (or a stock
kernel) for 8k stacks, just we're not too sure how risky the default
fc3 setup is.


You'll know after you figure out how often you hit problems.  :)

We're also thinking of running RHEL AS4 instead of fc3 (they are very
similar), but that definitely needs a recompile as XFS isn't included in
the default AS4 kernel :-/


Yep... that's something I've been meaning to look into as well - although the 4k stack issue remains.

-Eric


AS 4.0 uses the 8K stack model, but yes, their filesystem selection seems a little limited. Suse is actually looking pretty good right now, and I have an ubuntu install running on a box right now just to check it out.

Steve


Steve


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>