From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 21 13:24:22 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C354816A425 for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 13:24:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from mx3.mail.ru (mx3.mail.ru [194.67.23.149]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5A743D46 for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 13:24:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from [213.148.29.33] (port=4547 helo=nexii.panopticon) by mx3.mail.ru with esmtp id 1Fhnuu-0007NN-00 for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:24:20 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.2]) by nexii.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6951140E for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:28:59 +0400 (MSD) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AD9C346B; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:25:27 +0400 (MSD) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:25:27 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060521132527.GA67386@hades.panopticon> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Subject: NFS safety in 6.1-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:24:22 -0000 Hi! In the TODO list for 6.1 RELEASE there was (and still is - http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.1R/todo.html) one entry that bugs me: Issue: NFS data corruption between two 7.0 machines Status: In progress Responsible: Mohan Srinivasan Description: Running fsx between a 7.0 NFS client and server detects data corruption. This problem can also be reproduced by using 6.1 NFS server. The problem seems to be avoidable by turning off the attribute cache on the NFS client. So I wanted to ask what's status of NFS for release - was that issue fixed and is it safe to use client and server NFS on 6.1 RELEASE? If there's still data corruption possible, how do I turn off the attribute cache? -- Best regards, Dmitry mailto:amdmi3@mail.ru From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 21 15:46:29 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC2316A42A for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 15:46:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4492243D4C for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 15:46:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4LFkJkB087940; Sun, 21 May 2006 09:46:25 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <44708B42.9050608@samsco.org> Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 09:46:10 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Marakasov References: <20060521132527.GA67386@hades.panopticon> In-Reply-To: <20060521132527.GA67386@hades.panopticon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS safety in 6.1-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 15:46:37 -0000 Dmitry Marakasov wrote: > Hi! > > In the TODO list for 6.1 RELEASE there was (and still is - > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.1R/todo.html) one entry that > bugs me: > > Issue: NFS data corruption between two 7.0 machines > Status: In progress > Responsible: Mohan Srinivasan > Description: Running fsx between a 7.0 NFS client and server detects > data corruption. This problem can also be reproduced by using 6.1 > NFS server. The problem seems to be avoidable by turning off the > attribute cache on the NFS client. > > So I wanted to ask what's status of NFS for release - was that issue > fixed and is it safe to use client and server NFS on 6.1 RELEASE? > If there's still data corruption possible, how do I turn off the > attribute cache? > Dang, I meant to document that before the release, sorry. There are two variants that I've seen with 6.1. One is between a Linux client and a FreeBSD server. This seems to be effectively fixed by using a 2.6.12 or later Linux kernel. The other is due to any client or server disagreeing on the precision of the timestamps that are passed in the attributes. This disagreement can lead to the attribue cache getting confused and returning incorrect data to the caller. It can be turned off by either changing the default timeouts to 0 that are defined in the nfsclient code, or by setting the appropriate mount options in mount_nfs as per the man page. Scott From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 21 16:36:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EDF16A41F for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 16:36:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from mx7.mail.ru (mx7.mail.ru [194.67.23.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD4743D4C for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 16:36:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from [213.148.29.33] (port=14083 helo=nexii.panopticon) by mx7.mail.ru with esmtp id 1FhqvF-000KQL-00; Sun, 21 May 2006 20:36:53 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.2]) by nexii.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3079C11449; Sun, 21 May 2006 20:41:27 +0400 (MSD) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 544FCA00; Sun, 21 May 2006 20:38:03 +0400 (MSD) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 20:38:03 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Scott Long Message-ID: <20060521163803.GB923@hades.panopticon> Mail-Followup-To: Scott Long , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <20060521132527.GA67386@hades.panopticon> <44708B42.9050608@samsco.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44708B42.9050608@samsco.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS safety in 6.1-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 16:36:55 -0000 * Scott Long (scottl@samsco.org) wrote: > >So I wanted to ask what's status of NFS for release - was that issue > >fixed and is it safe to use client and server NFS on 6.1 RELEASE? > >If there's still data corruption possible, how do I turn off the > >attribute cache? > > Dang, I meant to document that before the release, sorry. There are two > variants > that I've seen with 6.1. One is between a Linux client and a FreeBSD > server. This > seems to be effectively fixed by using a 2.6.12 or later Linux kernel. My cases are 6.0 server - 6.1 client and 6.1 - 6.1 > The other is > due to any client or server disagreeing on the precision of the > timestamps that are > passed in the attributes. This disagreement can lead to the attribue > cache getting > confused and returning incorrect data to the caller. It can be turned > off by either > changing the default timeouts to 0 that are defined in the nfsclient > code, or by setting > the appropriate mount options in mount_nfs as per the man page. Thanks a lot for the help. Do I get it right that only file attributes may be currupted, not the data itself? -- Best regards, Dmitry mailto:amdmi3@mail.ru From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 21 17:53:06 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0990D16A7C7 for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:53:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EED8243D73 for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:52:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1141A4D95; Sun, 21 May 2006 10:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2882D52405; Sun, 21 May 2006 13:52:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:52:40 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Jason Arnaute Message-ID: <20060521175240.GA21069@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060520191623.47325.qmail@web50901.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AqsLC8rIMeq19msA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060520191623.47325.qmail@web50901.mail.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: feature parity with linux ... perhaps with "filesystem quotas" ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:53:12 -0000 --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 12:16:23PM -0700, Jason Arnaute wrote: > So I see this article on Slashdot: >=20 > http://bsd.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=3D06/05/13/0740227 >=20 > and I notice that same article is referenced now on > the front page of freebsd.org. >=20 > Apparently FreeBSD developers are working on > "approaching feature parity with Linux". >=20 > Quick Question: >=20 > Does this mean that we will have working filesystem > quotas in FreeBSD in the next year or two ? They are now believed to work in 6.1-STABLE. Please test and file a PR if you find otherwise. Kris --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEcKjoWry0BWjoQKURAm86AKDHDzUvoyS1r4RHxvR8V9KAAUPSqACgojGU nXjsL7coan8xS22dB3y5/GM= =4yet -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA-- From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 21 17:57:03 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD01C16A8B3 for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:57:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE4B43D5F for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 17:57:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640DA1A4DAE for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 10:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CCDF452405; Sun, 21 May 2006 13:57:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 13:57:02 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060521175702.GB21069@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060521132527.GA67386@hades.panopticon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VrqPEDrXMn8OVzN4" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060521132527.GA67386@hades.panopticon> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Subject: Re: NFS safety in 6.1-RELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 17:57:12 -0000 --VrqPEDrXMn8OVzN4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 05:25:27PM +0400, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: > Hi! >=20 > In the TODO list for 6.1 RELEASE there was (and still is - > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.1R/todo.html) one entry that > bugs me: >=20 > Issue: NFS data corruption between two 7.0 machines > Status: In progress > Responsible: Mohan Srinivasan > Description: Running fsx between a 7.0 NFS client and server detects > data corruption. This problem can also be reproduced by using 6.1 > NFS server. The problem seems to be avoidable by turning off the > attribute cache on the NFS client. >=20 > So I wanted to ask what's status of NFS for release - was that issue > fixed and is it safe to use client and server NFS on 6.1 RELEASE? > If there's still data corruption possible, how do I turn off the > attribute cache? It's worth pointing out that the known problems either only manifest a) when running against specific servers (e.g. certain old Linux kernels, which probably means "server bug") b) under extremely high loads (my test suite uses 1000 concurrent filesystem I/O generators) Apart from the issues Scott mentioned, there is also a problem with writes via mmap() not being committed correctly, so subsequent reads do not see the correct data. This is not yet understood since it only occurs under condition b), so it's very hard to diagnose. For most users, these issues are unlikely to ever be encountered. Kris --VrqPEDrXMn8OVzN4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEcKnuWry0BWjoQKURAssIAJ4qkK7Xrp7/xDOzRIdUuj8wXYQItACeLUKu zkkBlEraD3CbiDq8wSU4hLc= =R4nF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VrqPEDrXMn8OVzN4-- From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 24 06:14:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 336B416A41F for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 06:14:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kent@team.outblaze.com) Received: from corpmail.outblaze.com (corpmail.outblaze.com [203.86.166.82]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB07743D45 for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 06:14:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kent@team.outblaze.com) Received: from vexira-out.outblaze.com (unknown [210.17.191.253]) by corpmail.outblaze.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 96CD237D4F for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 06:14:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from int.hk.outblaze.com (203-86-166-97.outblaze.com [203.86.166.97]) by corpmail.outblaze.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E039216DD83 for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 06:14:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 3507 invoked from network); 24 May 2006 06:14:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.177?) (kent@team.outblaze.com@210.177.227.130) by smtp1.hk1.outblaze.com with SMTP; 24 May 2006 06:14:36 -0000 Message-ID: <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:17:51 +0800 From: Kent Ho User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060420) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiVirus: Checked by VAMS 1.57.2 Build 1.57.2-21 VDB 8.1191 Subject: Access to UFS stuck during snapshot. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 06:14:48 -0000 Hi, I having problems accessing file system during snapshot runs. snapshot takes approximately 10 to 20 mins to run. During that time access to files in the file system are blocked until the snapshot has completed. Lot of processes was stuck and piles up on the fs. This fs stores mailboxes and it's accessed 24/7. This is similar to what described in this thread. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=14968+0+/usr/local/www/db/text/2006/freebsd-fs/20060312.freebsd-fs Has this been improved or fixed in recent releases, I see a bunch of fixes in march? any possible work around? any alternatives or recommendations? Looking for high availability fs with snapshots. I'm running: FreeBSD fs1 5.4-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE #0: Sun May 8 10:21:06 UTC 2005 root@harlow.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.40GHz 3ware 9000 series Storage Controller 1GB RAM I've switched from netapp to Freebsd. Many thanks in advance. Kent. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 24 06:18:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33EC316A4E1 for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 06:18:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89C443D45 for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 06:18:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80011A3C25; Tue, 23 May 2006 23:18:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 08B5F51744; Wed, 24 May 2006 02:18:49 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 02:18:48 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Kent Ho Message-ID: <20060524061848.GA58522@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Access to UFS stuck during snapshot. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 06:18:51 -0000 --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:17:51PM +0800, Kent Ho wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I having problems accessing file system during snapshot runs. snapshot= =20 > takes approximately 10 to 20 mins to run. >=20 > During that time access to files in the file system are blocked until=20 > the snapshot has completed. Lot of processes was stuck and piles up on= =20 > the fs. >=20 > This fs stores mailboxes and it's accessed 24/7. This is similar to=20 > what described in this thread. >=20 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=3D14968+0+/usr/local/www/db/t= ext/2006/freebsd-fs/20060312.freebsd-fs >=20 > Has this been improved or fixed in recent releases, I see a bunch of=20 > fixes in march? any possible work around? any alternatives or=20 > recommendations? Looking for high availability fs with snapshots. It's by design. Kris --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEc/rIWry0BWjoQKURAodfAKDY6anbqS4ZGWbWdgT0uWK7mkrY0ACeJ7ta 8CwTTgY7JaVLXubXRTlzw6E= =3uP9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd-- From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 24 12:18:01 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 199D916A447 for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 12:18:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh2.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7607C43D4C for ; Wed, 24 May 2006 12:18:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh2.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4OCHvAd083891; Wed, 24 May 2006 07:17:59 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <44744EF8.2000000@centtech.com> Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 07:18:00 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060506) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> <20060524061848.GA58522@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060524061848.GA58522@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1479/Wed May 24 00:17:23 2006 on mh2.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Access to UFS stuck during snapshot. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 12:18:01 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:17:51PM +0800, Kent Ho wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I having problems accessing file system during snapshot runs. snapshot >> takes approximately 10 to 20 mins to run. >> >> During that time access to files in the file system are blocked until >> the snapshot has completed. Lot of processes was stuck and piles up on >> the fs. >> >> This fs stores mailboxes and it's accessed 24/7. This is similar to >> what described in this thread. >> >> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=14968+0+/usr/local/www/db/text/2006/freebsd-fs/20060312.freebsd-fs >> >> Has this been improved or fixed in recent releases, I see a bunch of >> fixes in march? any possible work around? any alternatives or >> recommendations? Looking for high availability fs with snapshots. > > It's by design. > > Kris I found that making the .snap directories permissions 0700, and then making a subdirectory under the .snap that stores the actual snapshots helped, as long as I did not make any stat() calls to the snapshot file that was in snaplk state. Kris - you've had your head deep in the snapshot spaghetti recently - is this blocking just a matter of the locking on the snapshot file and a stat() call blocking on it, which causes an upward locking to the root dir of the filesystem? Could this be avoided by 'hiding' the snapshot file while a snapshot is in progress? I have been tinkering with hiding the snapshot directory during snapshot creation, but I don't have any results of anything yet, still too early. I'm a wannabe hacker, so my progress is slow. Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 24 13:17:55 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03A016A42B; Wed, 24 May 2006 13:17:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FED743D45; Wed, 24 May 2006 13:17:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from [212.40.38.87] (oddity-e.topspin.kiev.ua [212.40.38.87]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id QAA22592; Wed, 24 May 2006 16:17:42 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Message-ID: <44745CF6.1040402@icyb.net.ua> Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 16:17:42 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060512) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-U Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: state of fs/udf X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 13:18:00 -0000 It seems that UDF fs has been in not-well-supported state for a while now. It seems that Scott Long, original author and maintainer, has moved on to other more important (and, perhaps, interesting) things. ("perhaps" - because RE does not seem to be too exciting on the first glance) Meanwhile, there are several bugs still opened for UDF. Some of them are pretty obvious, some with good patches, some not so trivial, some unhelpful and some are mine :-) I think the following PRs are good candidates for review and possible inclusion into source: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/77234 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/78987 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/92040 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/84983 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/90521 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/97786 Also, from our private conversations I know that Bruce Evans has even more fixes for more problems and better fixes for some bugs described in the above PRs. Those patches that I personally submitted do WorkForMe (TM), but I think that Bruce has much better understanding of VFS stuff and done much better job. Would some committer be so kind to adopt UDF, review the PRs and fix at least the most obvious bugs before 6.2 ? I personally promise to help with testing and discussing things. -- Andriy Gapon From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 24 14:47:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B710816A841; Wed, 24 May 2006 14:47:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from maxim@macomnet.ru) Received: from mp2.macomnet.net (mp2.macomnet.net [195.128.64.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D8C43D60; Wed, 24 May 2006 14:47:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from maxim@macomnet.ru) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mp2.macomnet.net (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4OElNs8080603; Wed, 24 May 2006 18:47:23 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from maxim@macomnet.ru) Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 18:47:23 +0400 (MSD) From: Maxim Konovalov To: bde@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <44745CF6.1040402@icyb.net.ua> Message-ID: <20060524184610.W79889@mp2.macomnet.net> References: <44745CF6.1040402@icyb.net.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon Subject: Re: state of fs/udf X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 14:47:33 -0000 [ CC: Bruce ] Bruce, On Wed, 24 May 2006, 16:17+0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > It seems that UDF fs has been in not-well-supported state for a while > now. It seems that Scott Long, original author and maintainer, has moved > on to other more important (and, perhaps, interesting) things. > ("perhaps" - because RE does not seem to be too exciting on the first > glance) > > Meanwhile, there are several bugs still opened for UDF. Some of them are > pretty obvious, some with good patches, some not so trivial, some > unhelpful and some are mine :-) > I think the following PRs are good candidates for review and possible > inclusion into source: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/77234 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/78987 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/92040 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/84983 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/90521 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/97786 > > Also, from our private conversations I know that Bruce Evans has even > more fixes for more problems and better fixes for some bugs described in > the above PRs. Those patches that I personally submitted do WorkForMe > (TM), but I think that Bruce has much better understanding of VFS stuff > and done much better job. > > Would some committer be so kind to adopt UDF, review the PRs and fix at > least the most obvious bugs before 6.2 ? > I personally promise to help with testing and discussing things. Why don't you just commit these fixes? -- Maxim Konovalov From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 12:12:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904C716A51D; Thu, 25 May 2006 12:12:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com) Received: from hotmail.com (bay23-f7.bay23.hotmail.com [64.4.22.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 561B843D46; Thu, 25 May 2006 12:12:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 25 May 2006 05:12:43 -0700 Message-ID: Received: from 69.45.64.21 by by23fd.bay23.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 12:12:42 GMT X-Originating-IP: [61.187.16.2] X-Originating-Email: [yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com] X-Sender: yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com From: "etalk etalk" To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 20:12:42 +0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 May 2006 12:12:43.0024 (UTC) FILETIME=[86665900:01C67FF4] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:30:02 +0000 Cc: Subject: about ufs filesystem io performance! X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:12:47 -0000 5.3 vs 6.0 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is ¡°./iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 1m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ¡± (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory. Figure1~Figure5 show the results of the file system performance comparison between Bsd5.3¡¯s UFS2 and Bsd6.0¡¯s UFS2 when testing with different file system (local, sync, async, softupdate, sync+softupdate). According to the figures, our conclusion is: On all kinds of file systems, the write, rewrite, read and reread performance of the two is almost same and we cant say that Bsd6.0 make a improvement on file system IO performance. http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204114.aspx linux2.6.11 vs bsd 5.3 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is ¡°./iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 4m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ¡± (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory, Figure1, Figure2, Figure3 show the results of the file system performance comparison between Bsd¡¯s UFS2 and Linux¡¯ Ext3 (the Linux kernel version is 2.6.11, and the Bsd kernel version is 5.3) when testing with sync, async and local (Bsd using softupdate) file system. According to the figures, our conclusion is: a.On local file system and async file system, Fedora4¡¯s write and rewrite is much faster than Bsd5.3¡¯s (about 5-10 times). b.On all kinds of file systems, the read and reread performance of FreeBsd5.3 is about 50%-90% lower than that of Fedora4. c.On sync file system, Bsd5.3 writes several times faster than Fedora4 does and rewrites over two hundred times faster than Fedora4 does. http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204107.aspx _________________________________________________________________ ÏíÓÃÊÀ½çÉÏ×î´óµÄµç×ÓÓʼþϵͳ¡ª MSN Hotmail¡£ http://www.hotmail.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 12:46:42 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C573516A421; Thu, 25 May 2006 12:46:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B40043D46; Thu, 25 May 2006 12:46:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4PCkfov041868; Thu, 25 May 2006 07:46:41 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <4475A734.4040909@centtech.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:46:44 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060506) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: etalk etalk References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1481/Thu May 25 04:29:10 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:46:42 -0000 etalk etalk wrote: > 5.3 vs 6.0 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is > “./iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 1m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b > outfile-Af.xls ” (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the > tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory. > Figure1~Figure5 show the results of the file system performance > comparison between Bsd5.3’s UFS2 and Bsd6.0’s UFS2 when testing with > different file system (local, sync, async, softupdate, sync+softupdate). > According to the figures, our conclusion is: On all kinds of file > systems, the write, rewrite, read and reread performance of the two is > almost same and we cant say that Bsd6.0 make a improvement on file > system IO performance. > http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204114.aspx > linux2.6.11 vs bsd 5.3 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test > command is “./iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 4m -q 8k -y 2k -R > -b outfile-Af.xls ” (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the > tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory, > Figure1, Figure2, Figure3 show the results of the file system > performance comparison between Bsd’s UFS2 and Linux’ Ext3 (the Linux > kernel version is 2.6.11, and the Bsd kernel version is 5.3) when > testing with sync, async and local (Bsd using softupdate) file system. > According to the figures, our conclusion is: a.On local file system and > async file system, Fedora4’s write and rewrite is much faster than > Bsd5.3’s (about 5-10 times). b.On all kinds of file systems, the read > and reread performance of FreeBsd5.3 is about 50%-90% lower than that of > Fedora4. c.On sync file system, Bsd5.3 writes several times faster than > Fedora4 does and rewrites over two hundred times faster than Fedora4 > does. http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204107.aspx You don't report the type of disks you are using, or anything about the storage. For the first test, I'd think that it's possible that you were hitting hardware performance bottlenecks before actually testing the filesystem performance. Also, what are the 2,4,8 numbers referencing? How many times did you run the tests? Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 14:37:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B9516A6C0; Thu, 25 May 2006 14:37:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daichi@freebsd.org) Received: from natial.ongs.co.jp (natial.ongs.co.jp [202.216.232.58]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E08243D8A; Thu, 25 May 2006 14:37:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from daichi@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (dullmdaler.ongs.co.jp [202.216.232.62]) by natial.ongs.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2355F244C3A; Thu, 25 May 2006 23:37:15 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4475C119.1020305@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 23:37:13 +0900 From: Daichi GOTO User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060424) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <43E5D052.3020207@freebsd.org> <43E656C7.8040302@freesbie.org> <43E6D5C8.4050405@freebsd.org> <43E71485.5040901@freesbie.org> <43E73330.8070101@freebsd.org> <43EB4C00.2030101@freebsd.org> <4417DD8D.3050201@freebsd.org> <4433CA53.5050000@freebsd.org> <444E13BA.8050902@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <444E13BA.8050902@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:09:14 +0000 Cc: ozawa@ongs.co.jp, dkirhlarov@oilspace.com, Daichi GOTO , freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de, meianoite@gmail.com, kris@obsecurity.org, Alexander@Leidinger.net Subject: [ANN] unionfs patchset-12 release X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:37:36 -0000 Hi Guys! It is my pleasure and honor to announce the availability of the unionfs patchset-12. Patchset-12: For 7-current http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs-p12.diff For 6.x http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs6-p12.diff Changes in unionfs-p12.diff - Fixed a bug that responses without lock when share lock is requested with VOP_LOOKUP. - Fixed a bug that leads lock-around panic on FreeBSD 6.x. - others, misc bug fixes The documents of those unionfs patches: http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/ (English) http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/index-ja.html (Japanese) Guys taking some panic troubles with p11, please try the p12 :) We think that p12 is better stable than p11. Thanks -- Daichi GOTO, http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 17:49:12 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485B816B1EF for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:49:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: from mail.midwest-connections.com (mail.midwest-connections.com [69.148.152.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 002FB43D5C for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:49:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: (qmail 30089 invoked by uid 503); 25 May 2006 17:50:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zerda) (zanecb@69.155.32.130) by 0 with ESMTPA; 25 May 2006 17:50:38 -0000 Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:52:27 -0500 From: "Zane C.B." To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> Organization: Midwest Connections Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.2.0 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:49:18 -0000 I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple servers each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to date in real time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any other suggestions? From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 17:50:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA5D16B215 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EFD343D48 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:50:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4PHoZS0095397; Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:35 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:38 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060506) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Zane C.B." References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> In-Reply-To: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1484/Thu May 25 10:19:23 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:50:43 -0000 Zane C.B. wrote: > I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple servers > each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to date in real > time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any other suggestions? NFS? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 18:00:35 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B77CC16A74B for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 18:00:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: from mail.midwest-connections.com (mail.midwest-connections.com [69.148.152.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE8E43D8A for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 18:00:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: (qmail 8839 invoked by uid 503); 25 May 2006 18:01:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zerda) (zanecb@69.155.32.130) by 0 with ESMTPA; 25 May 2006 18:01:30 -0000 Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:03:19 -0500 From: "Zane C.B." To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> In-Reply-To: <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> Organization: Midwest Connections Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.2.0 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:00:49 -0000 On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:38 -0500 Eric Anderson wrote: > Zane C.B. wrote: > > I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple > > servers each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to > > date in real time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any > > other suggestions? > > NFS? NFS is nice, but it does not help when it comes to keeping a duplicate set of files on a second file server that is kept up to date in real time. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 18:27:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4DF16A76A for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 18:27:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.201.229]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 335A543D46 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 18:27:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 81650 invoked by uid 60001); 25 May 2006 18:27:30 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=p0pgzNxGl2Eu6IhfPeC0Nupl5B8/yeh7o+e3TlT6UWKyLEQ1jDob6/RDl804AxfZdGUzej17u1Ah9BykN7r0R4YdVXzSGhq81WNItLs9w1CXy5i2t6mTBs21K80SpGtI+oipd2Ty9WBSOTXqgG/eudKGUU4PoTQ4TqLqeDUXg+M= ; Message-ID: <20060525182730.81646.qmail@web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [213.54.67.46] by web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 11:27:30 PDT Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 11:27:30 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. B. Riddick" To: "Zane C.B." , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:27:50 -0000 --- "Zane C.B." wrote: > I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple servers > each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to date in real > time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any other suggestions? > Maybe mysql's master/slave functionality? Or any other database, that offers replication... CODA is like AFS and supported by FBSD since R2.2.5. In R6.1 there is a kernel module. Maybe it is worth a try, although I have not found a man page for coda... There seem to be two versions (coda.ko and coda5.ko)... And I found ports/net/coda*... In a ReadMe file I found a note, that the coda kernel module is not SMP-ready... Or Eric's NFS idea where read access is via NFS and where write access is via an own mechanism (e. g. each client remembers its update requests until all storage nodes committed those updates - each client should remember succeeded commits then, too...). :-)) -Arne __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 18:57:44 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B32D16ADA6 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 18:57:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh1.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964D843D58 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 18:57:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh1.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4PIvYSf007497; Thu, 25 May 2006 13:57:34 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <4475FE21.9050604@centtech.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:57:37 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060506) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Zane C.B." References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> In-Reply-To: <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1484/Thu May 25 10:19:23 2006 on mh1.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 18:57:59 -0000 Zane C.B. wrote: > On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:38 -0500 > Eric Anderson wrote: > >> Zane C.B. wrote: >>> I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple >>> servers each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to >>> date in real time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any >>> other suggestions? >> NFS? > > NFS is nice, but it does not help when it comes to keeping a duplicate > set of files on a second file server that is kept up to date in real > time. You could look at TDFS (Ivan's trivially distributed file system, based on fuse), or a ggated mirror (I've done some layout and tinkering with this, but no high-load testing). Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 19:18:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A04F116B8A9 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:18:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rees@citi.umich.edu) Received: from citi.umich.edu (citi.umich.edu [141.211.133.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8DA43D72 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:18:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rees@citi.umich.edu) Received: from citi.umich.edu (dumaguete.citi.umich.edu [141.211.133.51]) by citi.umich.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE2A61BC97 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 15:18:26 -0400 (EDT) To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org From: Jim Rees In-Reply-To: Eric Anderson, Thu, 25 May 2006 13:57:37 CDT Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:18:26 -0400 Sender: rees@citi.umich.edu Message-Id: <20060525191826.CE2A61BC97@citi.umich.edu> Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:18:37 -0000 Depends on what you want the multiple copies for. Load balancing? Bandwidth/latency? Disaster recovery? Network partition resilience? Solving this problem in the general case is a research problem, not something you can get off the shelf. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 19:21:57 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C06316B531 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:21:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: from mail.midwest-connections.com (mail.midwest-connections.com [69.148.152.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C8E43D91 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:21:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: (qmail 20325 invoked by uid 503); 25 May 2006 19:22:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zerda) (zanecb@69.155.32.130) by 0 with ESMTPA; 25 May 2006 19:22:57 -0000 Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:24:47 -0500 From: "Zane C.B." To: Eric Anderson Message-ID: <20060525142447.2685a14c@zerda> In-Reply-To: <4475FE21.9050604@centtech.com> References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> <4475FE21.9050604@centtech.com> Organization: Midwest Connections Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.2.0 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:22:16 -0000 On Thu, 25 May 2006 13:57:37 -0500 Eric Anderson wrote: > Zane C.B. wrote: > > On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:38 -0500 > > Eric Anderson wrote: > > > >> Zane C.B. wrote: > >>> I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple > >>> servers each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to > >>> date in real time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any > >>> other suggestions? > >> NFS? > > > > NFS is nice, but it does not help when it comes to keeping a > > duplicate set of files on a second file server that is kept up to > > date in real time. > > You could look at TDFS (Ivan's trivially distributed file system, > based on fuse), or a ggated mirror (I've done some layout and > tinkering with this, but no high-load testing). I am curious how is the ggated setup is working? I see the problem being it will have to be fscked if one of the machines goes down, before the other can take it's place. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 19:39:23 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9207A16BBFC for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:39:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: from mail.midwest-connections.com (mail.midwest-connections.com [69.148.152.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4E3C43D72 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 19:39:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from zanecb@midwest-connections.com) Received: (qmail 5325 invoked by uid 503); 25 May 2006 19:40:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zerda) (zanecb@69.155.32.130) by 0 with ESMTPA; 25 May 2006 19:40:50 -0000 Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 14:42:40 -0500 From: "Zane C.B." To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060525144240.2e6ad9c3@zerda> In-Reply-To: <20060525191826.CE2A61BC97@citi.umich.edu> References: <20060525191826.CE2A61BC97@citi.umich.edu> Organization: Midwest Connections Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.2.0 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:39:31 -0000 On Thu, 25 May 2006 15:18:26 -0400 Jim Rees wrote: > Depends on what you want the multiple copies for. Load balancing? > Bandwidth/latency? Disaster recovery? Network partition resilience? > Solving this problem in the general case is a research problem, not > something you can get off the shelf. Looking for something to use in the event of a file server dieing. So disaster recovery. Just reading up on coda and it is looking interesting. From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 20:15:12 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3CC516C115 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 20:15:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh2.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69EBD43D46 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 20:15:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh2.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4PKFCH3004227; Thu, 25 May 2006 15:15:12 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <44761052.5080006@centtech.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:15:14 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060506) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Zane C.B." References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> <4475FE21.9050604@centtech.com> <20060525142447.2685a14c@zerda> In-Reply-To: <20060525142447.2685a14c@zerda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1484/Thu May 25 10:19:23 2006 on mh2.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 20:15:14 -0000 Zane C.B. wrote: > On Thu, 25 May 2006 13:57:37 -0500 > Eric Anderson wrote: > >> Zane C.B. wrote: >>> On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:38 -0500 >>> Eric Anderson wrote: >>> >>>> Zane C.B. wrote: >>>>> I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple >>>>> servers each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to >>>>> date in real time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any >>>>> other suggestions? >>>> NFS? >>> NFS is nice, but it does not help when it comes to keeping a >>> duplicate set of files on a second file server that is kept up to >>> date in real time. >> You could look at TDFS (Ivan's trivially distributed file system, >> based on fuse), or a ggated mirror (I've done some layout and >> tinkering with this, but no high-load testing). > > I am curious how is the ggated setup is working? > > I see the problem being it will have to be fscked if one of the > machines goes down, before the other can take it's place. Thats correct, and there's no way around that really, unless you have softupdates enabled and mount it dangerously and do a background fsck (although some will warn of impending doom here). There's a lot of ways to do this, but what you sound like you want is a shared block device, with a single reader/writer to that disk, with a 'spare' machine ready to take over that reader/writer role at a moments notice. Does that sound right? Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 22:01:13 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99EB016CCF9 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:53:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC4FF43D60 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:53:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F0D1A4EEA; Thu, 25 May 2006 14:53:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 229875132C; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:53:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:53:15 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: Eric Anderson Message-ID: <20060525215314.GA31540@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> <20060524061848.GA58522@xor.obsecurity.org> <44744EF8.2000000@centtech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44744EF8.2000000@centtech.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: Access to UFS stuck during snapshot. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 22:01:18 -0000 --BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 07:18:00AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:17:51PM +0800, Kent Ho wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>I having problems accessing file system during snapshot runs. snapshot= =20 > >>takes approximately 10 to 20 mins to run. > >> > >>During that time access to files in the file system are blocked until= =20 > >>the snapshot has completed. Lot of processes was stuck and piles up on= =20 > >>the fs. > >> > >>This fs stores mailboxes and it's accessed 24/7. This is similar to=20 > >>what described in this thread. > >> > >>http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=3D14968+0+/usr/local/www/db= /text/2006/freebsd-fs/20060312.freebsd-fs > >> > >>Has this been improved or fixed in recent releases, I see a bunch of=20 > >>fixes in march? any possible work around? any alternatives or=20 > >>recommendations? Looking for high availability fs with snapshots. > > > >It's by design. > > > >Kris >=20 > I found that making the .snap directories permissions 0700, and then=20 > making a subdirectory under the .snap that stores the actual snapshots=20 > helped, as long as I did not make any stat() calls to the snapshot file= =20 > that was in snaplk state. >=20 > Kris - you've had your head deep in the snapshot spaghetti recently - is= =20 > this blocking just a matter of the locking on the snapshot file and a=20 > stat() call blocking on it, which causes an upward locking to the root=20 > dir of the filesystem? Could this be avoided by 'hiding' the snapshot=20 > file while a snapshot is in progress? I have been tinkering with hiding= =20 > the snapshot directory during snapshot creation, but I don't have any=20 > results of anything yet, still too early. I'm a wannabe hacker, so my=20 > progress is slow. No, I/O is suspended while the snapshot is being created. As I said, it's a design limitation. Kris --BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEdidKWry0BWjoQKURAjlZAJ9KPtP0FOBiV/F+JtnqfHZitSS1gACglL+T aqnKfcAMTqJBsFoqdNbjb0Y= =O6BU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3-- From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 22:09:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3566C16CBB9; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:58:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB68543D64; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:58:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C721A4EE7; Thu, 25 May 2006 14:58:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2150851370; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:58:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:58:10 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway To: etalk etalk Message-ID: <20060525215810.GB31540@xor.obsecurity.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3uo+9/B/ebqu+fSQ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 22:10:01 -0000 --3uo+9/B/ebqu+fSQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 08:12:42PM +0800, etalk etalk wrote: > 5.3 vs 6.0=20 > The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is ??./iozone -A -f=20 > /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 1m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ??=20 > (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the tests on the same PC= =20 > with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory. Figure1~Figure5 show the= =20 > results of the file system performance comparison between Bsd5.3??s UFS2= =20 > and Bsd6.0??s UFS2 when testing with different file system (local, sync,= =20 > async, softupdate, sync+softupdate).=20 >=20 > According to the figures, our conclusion is:=20 > On all kinds of file systems, the write, rewrite, read and reread=20 > performance of the two is almost same and we cant say that Bsd6.0 make a= =20 > improvement on file system IO performance.=20 Very unlikely, since the former is giant locked and the latter not. I saw a performance improvement of up to a factor of 7 in favour of 6.0 when I tested concurrent I/O. http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/bsdcan/Filesystem%20Performance.pdf If this is truly what you're seeing, then you're probably hitting some other bottleneck and not actually testing filesystem performance. Kris --3uo+9/B/ebqu+fSQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEdihyWry0BWjoQKURAgn/AJ47wqzyD75T8OMhA7wWfUZ+v/sTcQCgz5Ir R+4hKHNLp36E34TvFeifrBA= =UMyL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3uo+9/B/ebqu+fSQ-- From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 25 23:59:19 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A529716A556 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 23:59:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from loukamenov@gmail.com) Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.192]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1619843D46 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 23:59:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from loukamenov@gmail.com) Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id n1so460293nzf for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 16:59:13 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Ai6puH0ZV6DKxg5vnwNHLK9eG88HHbCCHHqgRo1zFXGIMvfNFYxUR6bj2v3jZg+GBj8nTiAIUeVKLqJZdwArDS+WcGfZgUusz3t1FxcuLrJIsQMHopiHXge/UkDluq7sDLL8xEEWdWfHgq5U+uK8n37SgWv6eC/C9MKuDYEzq88= Received: by 10.65.234.11 with SMTP id l11mr193639qbr; Thu, 25 May 2006 16:59:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.132.16 with HTTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 16:59:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <76f962c60605251659q45ec5cc8t31cc8c1da5f4f42b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 19:59:13 -0400 From: "Lou Kamenov" To: "Zane C.B." In-Reply-To: <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 23:59:20 -0000 T24gNS8yNS8wNiwgWmFuZSBDLkIuIDx6YW5lY2JAbWlkd2VzdC1jb25uZWN0aW9ucy5jb20+IHdy b3RlOgo+IE9uIFRodSwgMjUgTWF5IDIwMDYgMTI6NTA6MzggLTA1MDAKPiBFcmljIEFuZGVyc29u IDxhbmRlcnNvbkBjZW50dGVjaC5jb20+IHdyb3RlOgo+ID4gTkZTPwo+IE5GUyBpcyBuaWNlLCBi dXQgaXQgZG9lcyBub3QgaGVscCB3aGVuIGl0IGNvbWVzIHRvIGtlZXBpbmcgYSBkdXBsaWNhdGUK PiBzZXQgb2YgZmlsZXMgb24gYSBzZWNvbmQgZmlsZSBzZXJ2ZXIgdGhhdCBpcyBrZXB0IHVwIHRv IGRhdGUgaW4gcmVhbAo+IHRpbWUuCgpORlMgKyBzc3luYy4KCkFGUywgQ09EQSByZXBsaWNhdGVk IHZvbHVtZXMuCgpsCg== From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 03:09:02 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FA4C16A4EB; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:09:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F72E43D4C; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:09:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4Q38sAH034280; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:09:00 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <44767146.30808@samsco.org> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:08:54 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andriy Gapon References: <44745CF6.1040402@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <44745CF6.1040402@icyb.net.ua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: state of fs/udf X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 03:09:03 -0000 Andriy Gapon wrote: > It seems that UDF fs has been in not-well-supported state for a while > now. It seems that Scott Long, original author and maintainer, has moved > on to other more important (and, perhaps, interesting) things. > ("perhaps" - because RE does not seem to be too exciting on the first > glance) > > Meanwhile, there are several bugs still opened for UDF. Some of them are > pretty obvious, some with good patches, some not so trivial, some > unhelpful and some are mine :-) > I think the following PRs are good candidates for review and possible > inclusion into source: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/77234 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/78987 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/92040 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/84983 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/90521 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/97786 > > Also, from our private conversations I know that Bruce Evans has even > more fixes for more problems and better fixes for some bugs described in > the above PRs. Those patches that I personally submitted do WorkForMe > (TM), but I think that Bruce has much better understanding of VFS stuff > and done much better job. > > Would some committer be so kind to adopt UDF, review the PRs and fix at > least the most obvious bugs before 6.2 ? > I personally promise to help with testing and discussing things. > Sorry I've been remiss. I'll look at these this weekend. Scott From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 03:28:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9A616A420 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:28:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78BE043D48 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:28:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.14] (imini.samsco.home [192.168.254.14]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4Q3AgiW034288; Thu, 25 May 2006 21:10:48 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <447671B2.4040004@samsco.org> Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 21:10:42 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050416 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Zane C.B." References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> In-Reply-To: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 03:28:59 -0000 Zane C.B. wrote: > I am looking for something that will allow my to have multiple servers > each containing the same filesystem and it is kept up to date in real > time. Any one have any opinions on AFS or have any other suggestions? Lucent did a replicated filesystem a few years ago that is much like what you are looking for. They actually did it for FreeBSD, too. Search their site for the 'Starfish' project. Scott From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 08:15:52 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C58C416A45B; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:15:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com) Received: from hotmail.com (bay23-f22.bay23.hotmail.com [64.4.22.72]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88CC943D46; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:15:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 26 May 2006 01:15:52 -0700 Message-ID: Received: from 69.45.64.18 by by23fd.bay23.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:15:51 GMT X-Originating-IP: [61.187.16.2] X-Originating-Email: [yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com] X-Sender: yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com In-Reply-To: <20060525215810.GB31540@xor.obsecurity.org> From: "etalk etalk" To: kris@obsecurity.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:15:51 +0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 May 2006 08:15:52.0294 (UTC) FILETIME=[9A8EC860:01C6809C] Cc: Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 08:15:53 -0000 >From: Kris Kennaway >To: etalk etalk >CC: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! >Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:58:10 -0400 > >On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 08:12:42PM +0800, etalk etalk wrote: > > 5.3 vs 6.0 > > The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is ??./iozone -A -f > > /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 1m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ?? > > (http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all the tests on the same PC > > with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main memory. Figure1~Figure5 show the > > results of the file system performance comparison between Bsd5.3??s UFS2 > > and Bsd6.0??s UFS2 when testing with different file system (local, sync, > > async, softupdate, sync+softupdate). > > > > According to the figures, our conclusion is: > > On all kinds of file systems, the write, rewrite, read and reread > > performance of the two is almost same and we cant say that Bsd6.0 make a > > improvement on file system IO performance. > >Very unlikely, since the former is giant locked and the latter not. I >saw a performance improvement of up to a factor of 7 in favour of 6.0 >when I tested concurrent I/O. > >http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/bsdcan/Filesystem%20Performance.pdf > >If this is truly what you're seeing, then you're probably hitting some >other bottleneck and not actually testing filesystem performance. > >Kris I can not see the pdf file,and how can i test concurrent I/O in 5.3 vs 6.0, is there some tools or patch? ><< attach3 >> _________________________________________________________________ ÓëÁª»úµÄÅóÓѽøÐн»Á÷£¬ÇëʹÓà MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com/cn From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 08:02:51 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B861016A41F; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:02:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com) Received: from hotmail.com (bay23-f25.bay23.hotmail.com [64.4.22.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CB143D48; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:02:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 26 May 2006 01:02:51 -0700 Message-ID: Received: from 69.45.64.19 by by23fd.bay23.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 26 May 2006 08:02:46 GMT X-Originating-IP: [61.187.16.2] X-Originating-Email: [yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com] X-Sender: yanyuejin2004@hotmail.com From: "etalk etalk" To: anderson@centtech.com, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:02:46 +0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 May 2006 08:02:51.0154 (UTC) FILETIME=[C8F64720:01C6809A] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 26 May 2006 11:19:23 +0000 Cc: Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 08:02:52 -0000 >From: Eric Anderson >To: etalk etalk >CC: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! >Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 07:46:44 -0500 > >etalk etalk wrote: >>5.3 vs 6.0 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test command is >>?/iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 1m -q 8k -y 2k -R -b >>outfile-Af.xls ?(http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We ran all >>the tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M main >>memory. Figure1~Figure5 show the results of the file system >>performance comparison between Bsd5.3’s UFS2 and Bsd6.0’s UFS2 when >>testing with different file system (local, sync, async, softupdate, >>sync+softupdate). >>According to the figures, our conclusion is: On all kinds of file >>systems, the write, rewrite, read and reread performance of the two >>is almost same and we cant say that Bsd6.0 make a improvement on >>file system IO performance. >>http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204114.aspx >>linux2.6.11 vs bsd 5.3 The test tool is Iozone3_257, and the test >>command is ?/iozone -A -f /mnt/tmpfile.test -g 1g -n 4m -q 8k -y >>2k -R -b outfile-Af.xls ?(http://www.iozone.org/src/current/). We >>ran all the tests on the same PC with 2.4 GHz Pentium CPU and 512M >>main memory, Figure1, Figure2, Figure3 show the results of the file >>system performance comparison between Bsd’s UFS2 and Linux?Ext3 >>(the Linux kernel version is 2.6.11, and the Bsd kernel version is >>5.3) when testing with sync, async and local (Bsd using softupdate) >>file system. According to the figures, our conclusion is: a.On >>local file system and async file system, Fedora4’s write and >>rewrite is much faster than Bsd5.3’s (about 5-10 times). b.On all >>kinds of file systems, the read and reread performance of >>FreeBsd5.3 is about 50%-90% lower than that of Fedora4. c.On sync >>file system, Bsd5.3 writes several times faster than Fedora4 does >>and rewrites over two hundred times faster than Fedora4 does. >>http://blog.csdn.net/minerboyIo/Gallery/204107.aspx > >You don't report the type of disks you are using, or anything about >the storage. For the first test, I'd think that it's possible that >you were hitting hardware performance bottlenecks before actually >testing the filesystem performance. > >Also, what are the 2,4,8 numbers referencing? How many times did >you run the tests? > > >Eric > > > > > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur >Technology >Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. >------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks for your reply! My disk is Maxtor 2F040L0 with 40GB capacity , 5400 rpm and <12ms ave seek time, and the 2,4,8 is the block size when doing the writes and reads, We do the tests two times,and the results is same,One of the results is in the attachment! According to the conclusions,our puzzles is : a. Why the write and rewrite performance of FreeBsd5.3 is so lower than that of Fedora4 in async system or in local system? Can we improve the performace by tuning the FreeBsd5.3's kernel or by making some modifition to the kernel of FreeBsd5.3 in the file vfs_bio.c? b. Is Bsd6.0 make improvement in file system io performance when comparing to Bsd5.3? I am eager to have your reply! Best Regards etalk _________________________________________________________________ ÓëÁª»úµÄÅóÓѽøÐн»Á÷£¬ÇëʹÓà MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com/cn From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 11:38:03 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ACFB16A431 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 11:38:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C46B43D46 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 11:38:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3E146B0C; Fri, 26 May 2006 07:38:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:38:02 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Lou Kamenov In-Reply-To: <76f962c60605251659q45ec5cc8t31cc8c1da5f4f42b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060526123707.E18347@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060525125227.65f4b1df@zerda> <4475EE6E.3090004@centtech.com> <20060525130319.21a19a0e@zerda> <76f962c60605251659q45ec5cc8t31cc8c1da5f4f42b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Distributed file systems or the like. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 11:38:06 -0000 On Thu, 25 May 2006, Lou Kamenov wrote: > On 5/25/06, Zane C.B. wrote: >> On Thu, 25 May 2006 12:50:38 -0500 >> Eric Anderson wrote: >> > NFS? >> NFS is nice, but it does not help when it comes to keeping a duplicate >> set of files on a second file server that is kept up to date in real >> time. > > NFS + ssync. > > AFS, CODA replicated volumes. FYI, AFS supports replication of read-only volumes, but not of writable volumes. Coda supports read-write replication, but there may be usability issues in resolving conflicts in the presence of network partitions. Robert N M Watson From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 11:41:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4879B16A457; Fri, 26 May 2006 11:41:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF59D43D60; Fri, 26 May 2006 11:41:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C9746D1D; Fri, 26 May 2006 07:41:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:41:09 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: etalk etalk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060526123847.D18347@fledge.watson.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org Subject: Re: about ufs filesystem io performance! X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 11:41:10 -0000 On Fri, 26 May 2006, etalk etalk wrote: > b. Is Bsd6.0 make improvement in file system io performance when comparing > to Bsd5.3? I can't speak to (a), but I can say that FreeBSD 6.x is often significantly faster for file system performance, especially on SMP. This is because the Giant lock no longer covers the UFS file system. My recommendation would be to use FreeBSD 6.1 in preference to earlier 5.x or 6.x releases. While it is a recent release, it is also very promising, as it reflects a significant refinement on the 6.0 release, with important stability and performance improvments in many areas. It is the right baseline to measure and optimize from. Robert N M Watson From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 16:09:43 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9459216A9AB; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.192.82]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D73143D6E; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (c-71-233-168-2.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[71.233.168.2](misconfigured sender)) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20060526160941m1200j2pg9e>; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:41 +0000 Received: from c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4QG9eWJ002116; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:09:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc@c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) Received: (from rodrigc@localhost) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1/Submit) id k4QG9el4002115; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:09:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:09:40 -0400 From: Craig Rodrigues To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060526160940.GA2100@crodrigues.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-xfs@org Subject: [HEADSUP] Improved NFS export support for different filesystems X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:47 -0000 Hi, I have committed a bunch of changes to FreeBSD-CURRENT to improve support of NFS exporting different filesystems in FreeBSD. Before, the FreeBSD mountd program would only NFS export UFS, cd9660, msdosfs, and NTFS. I have removed that limitation. Now, if a filesystem properly supports the "update" and "export" mount options, then it should be able to export with mountd. For example, I have been able to export XFS (read-only). If people could test out my changes by NFS exporting different filesystems with mountd, and let me know if there are any problems, I would appreciate it. My changes are in FreeBSD-CURRENT only right now. -- Craig Rodrigues rodrigc@crodrigues.org From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 16:23:23 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA1816AB8E for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:23:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (rwcrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.192.83]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CF043D73 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:22:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (c-71-233-168-2.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[71.233.168.2](misconfigured sender)) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with ESMTP id <20060526162252m13009ufd6e>; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:22:53 +0000 Received: from c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4QGMpU7002327 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:22:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc@c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) Received: (from rodrigc@localhost) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1/Submit) id k4QGMpBY002326 for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:22:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc) Resent-Message-Id: <200605261622.k4QGMpBY002326@c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4QGD8Cq002155 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:13:08 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.comcast.net [204.127.198.10] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.5.2) for rodrigc@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 26 May 2006 12:13:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from maryjane.easydns.com ([205.210.42.52]) by rwcrmxc21.comcast.net (rwcrmxc21) with ESMTP id <20060526161149r2100rek9ee>; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:11:49 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [205.210.42.52] Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [216.136.204.119]) by maryjane.easydns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0DF52D16 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:11:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hub.freebsd.org (hub.freebsd.org [216.136.204.18]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 007B292FBF; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:10:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org) Received: from hub.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6C5F16AA16; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:10:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org) X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9459216A9AB; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.192.82]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D73143D6E; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rodrigc@crodrigues.org) Received: from c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (c-71-233-168-2.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[71.233.168.2](misconfigured sender)) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20060526160941m1200j2pg9e>; Fri, 26 May 2006 16:09:41 +0000 Received: from c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4QG9eWJ002116; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:09:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc@c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) Received: (from rodrigc@localhost) by c-24-147-19-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (8.13.6/8.13.1/Submit) id k4QG9el4002115; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:09:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:09:40 -0400 From: Craig Rodrigues To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060526160940.GA2100@crodrigues.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Errors-To: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Resent-From: rodrigc@crodrigues.org Resent-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:22:51 -0400 Resent-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-xfs@xfs.org Subject: [HEADSUP] Improved NFS export support for different filesystems X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:23:29 -0000 Hi, I have committed a bunch of changes to FreeBSD-CURRENT to improve support of NFS exporting different filesystems in FreeBSD. Before, the FreeBSD mountd program would only NFS export UFS, cd9660, msdosfs, and NTFS. I have removed that limitation. Now, if a filesystem properly supports the "update" and "export" mount options, then it should be able to export with mountd. For example, I have been able to export XFS (read-only). If people could test out my changes by NFS exporting different filesystems with mountd, and let me know if there are any problems, I would appreciate it. My changes are in FreeBSD-CURRENT only right now. -- Craig Rodrigues rodrigc@crodrigues.org _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 17:27:49 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C334F16A574 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 17:27:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gexlie@gmail.com) Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.224]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE39C43D55 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 17:27:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gexlie@gmail.com) Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i24so109114wra for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 10:27:47 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=EBBjaNcv+SbThtU+2fUjKZqst4C2R6EAudmq+BvXfgHfQOjSjsHsmWcmdIkAnkENosRESZ44kl6IErLriDag3jX//Z2XQNQHT5GVCZ0YzkLz5oJtlvIAm9t6N7hpATKBU68Xt+Xghcq/JNBG5DlluWJQ5hrP92d7RKSD0l0bicU= Received: by 10.65.148.10 with SMTP id a10mr590746qbo; Fri, 26 May 2006 10:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.150.10 with HTTP; Fri, 26 May 2006 10:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53cc795f0605261027x34633d92h91cc6194af849075@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 21:27:15 +0400 From: sekes To: "Craig Rodrigues" In-Reply-To: <20060526160940.GA2100@crodrigues.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20060526160940.GA2100@crodrigues.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-xfs@org.freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Improved NFS export support for different filesystems X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 17:27:51 -0000 i got this trying to mount remote file system malloc(M_WAITOK) of "mbuf", forcing M_NOWAIT with the following non-sleepable locks held: exclusive sleep mutex NFSmount lock r =3D 0 (0xc4be3000) locked @ /usr/src/sys/nfsclient/nfs_vfsops.c:335 KDB: stack backtrace: kdb_backtrace(1,c2aa6a00,c145c780,20,d5d6476c) at kdb_backtrace+0x29 witness_warn(5,0,c092a205,c0916527,c2aa6a00) at witness_warn+0x192 uma_zalloc_arg(c145c780,d5d64788,2) at uma_zalloc_arg+0x41 nfsm_disct(d5d647fc,d5d64800,30,20,2) at nfsm_disct+0x93 nfsm_dissect_xx_sub(30,d5d647fc,d5d64800,2,d5d64828) at nfsm_dissect_xx_sub+0x34 nfsm_dissect_xx(30,d5d647fc,d5d64800) at nfsm_dissect_xx+0x13 nfs_fsinfo(c4be3000,c45c6410,c2f2bb00,c2efca20) at nfs_fsinfo+0x102 mountnfs(d5d649ac,c2ade000,c2cd6a40,d5d6494c,d5d64900) at mountnfs+0x2a9 nfs_mount(c2ade000,c2efca20,0,0,c09c6760) at nfs_mount+0x17f vfs_domount(c2efca20,c4917c90,c2fef140,0,c2aad4a0) at vfs_domount+0x54e vfs_donmount(c2efca20,0,d5d64bb0,c3054c80,c) at vfs_donmount+0x3fd kernel_mount(c2aad480,0,c2aad480,c0923784,d5d64bf8) at kernel_mount+0x6d nfs_cmount(c2aad480,bfbfea60,0,c2efca20,c09c6760) at nfs_cmount+0x39 mount(c2efca20,d5d64d04,c3bac69c,c,c2efca20) at mount+0x146 syscall(3b,3b,3b,bfbfec85,bfbfea60) at syscall+0x27e Xint0x80_syscall() at Xint0x80_syscall+0x1f --- syscall (21, FreeBSD ELF32, mount), eip =3D 0x280bee1b, esp =3D 0xbfbfe= 61c, ebp =3D 0xbfbfead8 --- remote FS has succesfully mounted though On 5/26/06, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > Hi, > > I have committed a bunch of changes to FreeBSD-CURRENT > to improve support of NFS exporting different filesystems in FreeBSD. > > Before, the FreeBSD mountd program would only NFS export > UFS, cd9660, msdosfs, and NTFS. > > I have removed that limitation. Now, if a filesystem > properly supports the "update" and "export" mount options, > then it should be able to export with mountd. > > For example, I have been able to export XFS (read-only). > > If people could test out my changes by NFS exporting different > filesystems with mountd, and let me know if there are any > problems, I would appreciate it. My changes are in FreeBSD-CURRENT > only right now. > > -- > Craig Rodrigues > rodrigc@crodrigues.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " > From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 19:44:24 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FE816B677 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 19:44:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from mh2.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2DE443D76 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 19:44:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [192.168.42.22] (andersonbox2.centtech.com [192.168.42.22]) by mh2.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4QJiMwp048393; Fri, 26 May 2006 14:44:22 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <44775A9A.5080907@centtech.com> Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 14:44:26 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060506) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4473FA8F.6050102@outblaze.com> <20060524061848.GA58522@xor.obsecurity.org> <44744EF8.2000000@centtech.com> <20060525215314.GA31540@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060525215314.GA31540@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1486/Fri May 26 11:24:22 2006 on mh2.centtech.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Access to UFS stuck during snapshot. X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 19:44:39 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 07:18:00AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: >> Kris Kennaway wrote: >>> On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 02:17:51PM +0800, Kent Ho wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I having problems accessing file system during snapshot runs. snapshot >>>> takes approximately 10 to 20 mins to run. >>>> >>>> During that time access to files in the file system are blocked until >>>> the snapshot has completed. Lot of processes was stuck and piles up on >>>> the fs. >>>> >>>> This fs stores mailboxes and it's accessed 24/7. This is similar to >>>> what described in this thread. >>>> >>>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=14968+0+/usr/local/www/db/text/2006/freebsd-fs/20060312.freebsd-fs >>>> >>>> Has this been improved or fixed in recent releases, I see a bunch of >>>> fixes in march? any possible work around? any alternatives or >>>> recommendations? Looking for high availability fs with snapshots. >>> It's by design. >>> >>> Kris >> I found that making the .snap directories permissions 0700, and then >> making a subdirectory under the .snap that stores the actual snapshots >> helped, as long as I did not make any stat() calls to the snapshot file >> that was in snaplk state. >> >> Kris - you've had your head deep in the snapshot spaghetti recently - is >> this blocking just a matter of the locking on the snapshot file and a >> stat() call blocking on it, which causes an upward locking to the root >> dir of the filesystem? Could this be avoided by 'hiding' the snapshot >> file while a snapshot is in progress? I have been tinkering with hiding >> the snapshot directory during snapshot creation, but I don't have any >> results of anything yet, still too early. I'm a wannabe hacker, so my >> progress is slow. > > No, I/O is suspended while the snapshot is being created. As I said, > it's a design limitation. > > Kris The suspension is only during the second read of the cylinder group changes and such, right? I was under the impression that the suspension was actually quite quick, it's the initial copying of the cylinder groups that takes the most time, which the fs is not suspended until after that initial copy. My tests just now on my laptop seem to indicate as such (running 6-STABLE as of a few days ago). Is -current different now? Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 27 23:09:03 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fs@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F02216A65F for ; Sat, 27 May 2006 22:56:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ahaxawv@symon.com) Received: from symon.com (bdb168.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.27.243.168]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35AA343D46 for ; Sat, 27 May 2006 22:55:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ahaxawv@symon.com) Received: from localhost.localdomain (qxoscZpf90.mail3world.com [209.88.189.524]) by 209.88.189.524 (Postfix) with SMTP id omlhgpyyiu8i for ; Sun, 28 May 2006 00:52:59 +0100 Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 00:52:59 +0100 From: "wxrwupm xljtbsv" To: Content-return: allowed X-Mailer: phpmailer [version 1.41] X-Trailer: PHP Data URLENCODED 8 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: apache set sender to ahaxawv@symon.com using -f X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail2world.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <80537184305929.0v0ju31uq0@RimbovvHvRK> Cc: Subject: {Reply} st ock speculation for CTXE X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 23:09:12 -0000 CTXE***CTXE***CTXE***CTXE***CTXE***CTXE***CTXE Get CTXE First Thing Today, Check out for HOT NEWS!!! CTXE - CANTEX ENERGY CORP CURRENT_PRICE: $0.53 GET IT N0W! Before we start with the profile of CTXE we would like to mention something very important: There is a Big PR Campaign starting this weeek . And it will go all week so it would be best to get in NOW. Company Profile Cantex Energy Corporation is an independent, managed risk, oil and gas exploration, development, and production company headquartered in San Antonio, Texas. Recent News Cantex Energy Corp. Announces Completion of the GPS Survey Today and the Mobilization of Seismic Crews for Big Canyon 2D Swath, Management would like to report The GPS surveying of our Big Canyon 2D Swath Geophysical program is being completed today. The crew that has been obtained to conduct the seismic survey (Quantum Geophysical) will be mobilizing May 30 (plus or minus 2 days) to the Big Canyon Prospect. It will take the crews about 3 to 4 days to get all the equipment (cable and geophones) laid out on the ground and then another day of testing so we should be in full production mode on or around the 4th or 5th of June. Once the first of three lines are shot we will then get data processed and report progress on a weekly basis. Cantex Energy Corp. Receiving Interest From the Industry as It Enters Next Phase of Development Cantex Energy Corp. (CTXE - News) is pleased to report the following on its Big Canyon Prospect in West Texas. Recent company announcements related to the acquisition of over 48,000 acres of a world-class prospect has captured the attention of many oil & gas industry experts and corporations, who have recently inquired into various participation opportunities ranging from sharing science technology to support findings or expertise to drill, operate and manage wells. Trace Maurin, President of Cantex, commented, "Although we are a small independent oil & gas company, we have a very unique 0pp0rtunity in one of the last under-explored world-class potential gas plays with no geopolitical risks and the industry is starting to take notice. As we prepare to prove up the various structures within our prospect later this month, we are increasing our efforts to communicate on our progress to our shareholders and investors. Our intention is to provide investors with a better understanding of the full potential of this prospect as we embark on the next phase of operations." Starting immediately the company will undertake CEO interviews, radio spots (which will be recorded and published on the company website), publication placements, introductions to small cap institutional investors and funds all in an effort to optimize market awareness and keep our shareholder well informed. GET IN NOW Happy memorial day When pigs fly. We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Strong as an ox. Welcome to my garden. Walking on thin ice. A weed is no more than a flower in disguise. Useless as tits on bull. Were you born in a barn? Pull it up by the roots. Root it out. You never miss the water till the well runs dry. Sitting on the fence. Say it with flowers. Save it for a rainy day. They're like two peas in a pod. Tossed around like a hot potato. Slow as molasses in January. Wait and see. Water under the bridge. The sharper is the berry, the sweeter is the wine. Putting the cart before the horse. Survival of the fittest. She's the apple of my eye. Your ass is grass.