[gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Ow Mun Heng]

Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow filesystem writes?
I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like previously
15-20MB/s. 
I have read that there was some thing about "barriers" and I've tried
re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the performance didn't improve.

I've already fscked the fs w/ the latest xfsprogs (> 2.8.0) to no good
effect.

Anyone has any clue or suggestions? Else, I'm gonna go and change the FS
back to EXT3.

BTW: it's my /home which is XFS which houses GIGs of Mbox files as well
as VMware images.


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Jason Weisberger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]

Hello,

I just had the same problem.  I switched to XFS about two weeks ago, and all
I've heard out of my hard drive since then is churning and grinding.
Untarring large files is multitudes slower, even a simple emerge --sync
takes extra time.  Booting was also much slower.  I never measured
throughput, but it was bad enough that a benchmark was not needed to confirm
it.  Previously I had been using ext3 with no problems, no hard drive
churning.  I switched from xfs to reiser4 today out of frusteration...
Problem solved.

-- 
Jason Weisberger
jbdubbs@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 656 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Mark Kirkwood]

Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow filesystem writes?
> I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like previously
> 15-20MB/s. 
> I have read that there was some thing about "barriers" and I've tried
> re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the performance didn't improve.
> 
> I've already fscked the fs w/ the latest xfsprogs (> 2.8.0) to no good
> effect.
> 
> Anyone has any clue or suggestions? Else, I'm gonna go and change the FS
> back to EXT3.
> 
> BTW: it's my /home which is XFS which houses GIGs of Mbox files as well
> as VMware images.
> 
> 

What is your kernel version? (could be important).

I'm using 2.7.11 on kernel 2.6.16, write performance is reasonably good 
- 100 Mb/s on a 4 disk raid0 array (in fact I could probably do better 
if the promise driver would let me run the disks at udma5 instead of 
udma6....)


Cheers

Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Ow Mun Heng]

On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 18:11 +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
> > Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow filesystem writes?
> > I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like previously
> > 15-20MB/s. 
> > I have read that there was some thing about "barriers" and I've tried
> > re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the performance didn't improve.
> > 
> > I've already fscked the fs w/ the latest xfsprogs (> 2.8.0) to no good
> > effect.
> > 
> > Anyone has any clue or suggestions? Else, I'm gonna go and change the FS
> > back to EXT3.
> > 
> > BTW: it's my /home which is XFS which houses GIGs of Mbox files as well
> > as VMware images.
> > 
> > 
> 
> What is your kernel version? (could be important).

I've already updated it to the latest based on the suspend2 version.
$uname -r
2.6.17-suspend2-r4

$eix xfsprogs
     Available versions:  2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
     Installed:           2.8.10


> 
> I'm using 2.7.11 on kernel 2.6.16, write performance is reasonably good 

If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not mistaken) was introduced
in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be wrong, I don't have net
access so, I can't verify)

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Mark Kirkwood]

Ow Mun Heng wrote:
>
> I've already updated it to the latest based on the suspend2 version.
> $uname -r
> 2.6.17-suspend2-r4
> 
> $eix xfsprogs
>      Available versions:  2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
>      Installed:           2.8.10
> 
> 
> If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not mistaken) was introduced
> in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
> the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be wrong, I don't have net
> access so, I can't verify)
> 

Right - as it happens I'm doing an update today, so will let you know if 
   I see any write performance change.

Cheers

Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Mark Kirkwood]

Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
>>
>> I've already updated it to the latest based on the suspend2 version.
>> $uname -r
>> 2.6.17-suspend2-r4
>>
>> $eix xfsprogs
>>      Available versions:  2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
>>      Installed:           2.8.10
>>
>>
>> If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not mistaken) was introduced
>> in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
>> the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be wrong, I don't have net
>> access so, I can't verify)
>>
> 
> Right - as it happens I'm doing an update today, so will let you know if 
>   I see any write performance change.
> 


FWIW, I've updated to 2.6.17 and I don't see any change in performance 
at all (215Mb/s reads and 100Mb/s writes).

Now I'm on the standard source tree:

$ uname -r
2.6.17-gentoo-r7

$ eix xfsprogs
      Available versions:  2.7.3 2.7.11 ~2.8.10
      Installed:           2.7.11

which may be a factor.

The other thing I notice is that my filesystems are all under 50%, 
whereas your troublesome one was at 80%or so:

$ df -m
Filesystem           1M-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/md/2                  529       134       395  26% /
/dev/md/0                  129        10       120   8% /boot
/dev/md/3                 3911        32      3880   1% /tmp
/dev/md/4                 3911       175      3737   5% /var
/dev/md/5                19537      3008     16530  16% /usr
/dev/md/6                19537      2668     16870  14% /home
/dev/md/7               104841     25682     79160  25% /data0

I might try writing a few big files to fill one of 'em up and see if it 
makes any difference!

Cheers

Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Justin Piszcz]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Mark Kirkwood wrote:

> Mark Kirkwood wrote:
>> Ow Mun Heng wrote:
>>> 
>>> I've already updated it to the latest based on the suspend2 version.
>>> $uname -r
>>> 2.6.17-suspend2-r4
>>> 
>>> $eix xfsprogs
>>>      Available versions:  2.7.3 2.7.11 2.8.10
>>>      Installed:           2.8.10
>>> 
>>> 
>>> If not mistaken, the issue, (or barriers if not mistaken) was introduced
>>> in the 2.6.17 kernel series.
>>> the 2.6.16 series wasn't affected. (I could be wrong, I don't have net
>>> access so, I can't verify)
>>> 
>> 
>> Right - as it happens I'm doing an update today, so will let you know if 
>> I see any write performance change.
>> 
>
>
> FWIW, I've updated to 2.6.17 and I don't see any change in performance at all 
> (215Mb/s reads and 100Mb/s writes).
>
> Now I'm on the standard source tree:
>
> $ uname -r
> 2.6.17-gentoo-r7
>
> $ eix xfsprogs
>     Available versions:  2.7.3 2.7.11 ~2.8.10
>     Installed:           2.7.11
>
> which may be a factor.
>
> The other thing I notice is that my filesystems are all under 50%, whereas 
> your troublesome one was at 80%or so:
>
> $ df -m
> Filesystem           1M-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted on
> /dev/md/2                  529       134       395  26% /
> /dev/md/0                  129        10       120   8% /boot
> /dev/md/3                 3911        32      3880   1% /tmp
> /dev/md/4                 3911       175      3737   5% /var
> /dev/md/5                19537      3008     16530  16% /usr
> /dev/md/6                19537      2668     16870  14% /home
> /dev/md/7               104841     25682     79160  25% /data0
>
> I might try writing a few big files to fill one of 'em up and see if it makes 
> any difference!
>
> Cheers
>
> Mark
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>

You can also check your fragmentation, xfs_db -c frag /dev/..
and defrag it with xfs_fsir ..

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Richard Fish]

On 8/28/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> Has anyone here, who uses XFS fs, experiencing slow filesystem writes?
> I'm seeing throughput of like 4-3MB/s instead of like previously
> 15-20MB/s.
> I have read that there was some thing about "barriers" and I've tried
> re-mounting the FS w/ "nobarriers" but the performance didn't improve.

Hmm, nothing that I have seen.  I'm running 2.6.18-rc2.  My xfs
settings look like:

carcharias rjf # sysctl -a | grep xfs
fs.xfs.stats_clear = 0
fs.xfs.inherit_nodefrag = 1
fs.xfs.rotorstep = 1
fs.xfs.inherit_nosymlinks = 0
fs.xfs.age_buffer_centisecs = 1500
fs.xfs.xfsbufd_centisecs = 100
fs.xfs.inherit_noatime = 1
fs.xfs.inherit_nodump = 1
fs.xfs.inherit_sync = 1
fs.xfs.xfssyncd_centisecs = 500
fs.xfs.error_level = 3
fs.xfs.panic_mask = 0
fs.xfs.irix_symlink_mode = 0
fs.xfs.irix_sgid_inherit = 0
fs.xfs.restrict_chown = 1

I would make sure you are not mounting with the sync option, or have
anything with the sync flag set (chattr/lsattr).  I have seen that
result in performance like you describe...

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 172 bytes --]

On Tuesday 29 August 2006 10:37, Richard Fish wrote:

> fs.xfs.xfssyncd_centisecs = 500

Mine is set at 3000 by default, why is yours set at 500?
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Justin Piszcz]

There are a number of things you can do to speed up XFS.

# <file system> <mount point>   <type>  <options>       <dump>  <pass>
/dev/sda2       /               xfs 
logbufs=8,logbsize=262144,biosize=16,noatime,nodiratime   0       1

Try this :)


On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Mick wrote:

> On Tuesday 29 August 2006 10:37, Richard Fish wrote:
>
>> fs.xfs.xfssyncd_centisecs = 500
>
> Mine is set at 3000 by default, why is yours set at 500?
> -- 
> Regards,
> Mick
>
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Richard Fish]

On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> So.. it doesn't give me any clues there. However, doing Reads is OK. I
> get good performance when eg: copying a file from the XFS partition to
> another partition/drive.

How about the output of:

lsattr -Ra /home 2>dev/null | grep -v -e "-------------" -e ":$" -e "^$"

This should produce nothing.

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Ow Mun Heng]

On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 10:54 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> > So.. it doesn't give me any clues there. However, doing Reads is OK. I
> > get good performance when eg: copying a file from the XFS partition to
> > another partition/drive.
> 
> How about the output of:
> 
> lsattr -Ra /home 2>dev/null | grep -v -e "-------------" -e ":$" -e "^$"
> 
> This should produce nothing.

And you are right. It produces nothing.

The FS is now 80% Full
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda6              20G   16G  4.1G  80% /home

I think I'm gonna try re-formatting the drive/partition once more.
(There _may_ be latent curruption which I'm not aware off since I just
stuck a USB 200G drive w/XFS and read/write performance is Zippy.)

I'll report it once I get to it.



-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Jeff Grant]

http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/388

and

http://linuxgazette.net/122/TWDT.html#piszcz

These are two articles that indeed led me to believe that XFS was the
way to go - and here, I'm also experiencing some dreadful performance -
tar/untar performance specifically.

What to do.. .what to do...

-Jeff

Richard Fish wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
>> So.. it doesn't give me any clues there. However, doing Reads is OK. I
>> get good performance when eg: copying a file from the XFS partition to
>> another partition/drive.
> 
> Also, is the filesystem getting full?
> 
> -Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Richard Fish]

On 8/29/06, Jeff Grant <jgrant@voicesignal.com> wrote:
> These are two articles that indeed led me to believe that XFS was the
> way to go - and here, I'm also experiencing some dreadful performance -
> tar/untar performance specifically.

Can you define "dreadful"?  Are you seeing the same results (fast
reads but slow writes) as Ow?

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Jeff Grant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 661 bytes --]

You are correct, sir. Read times move at a nice clip - but untar/writes
seem to get cut almost in half. Just an observation - as I do not have
any solid data analysis atm - just a matter of scratching my skull
whilst I listen to what seems to be some serious HD churning.

-Jeff

Richard Fish wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Jeff Grant <jgrant@voicesignal.com> wrote:
>> These are two articles that indeed led me to believe that XFS was the
>> way to go - and here, I'm also experiencing some dreadful performance -
>> tar/untar performance specifically.
> 
> Can you define "dreadful"?  Are you seeing the same results (fast
> reads but slow writes) as Ow?
> 
> -Richard

[-- Attachment #2: jgrant.vcf --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 355 bytes --]

begin:vcard
fn:Jeff Grant
n:Grant;Jeff
org:VoiceSignal;Information Technology
adr:;;150 Presidential Way;Woburn;MA;01801;USA
email;internet:jgrant@voicesignal.com
title:Linux System Administrator
tel;work:(781)970-5209
tel;fax:(781)970-5200
tel;cell:(978)407-9512
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.voicesignal.com/
version:2.1
end:vcard

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Richard Fish]

On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> $ mount  | grep xfs
> /dev/hda6 on /home type xfs (rw)

Hmm, I missed this before.  "nobarrier" should be showing up here.  Try:

mount /home -o remount,nobarrier

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes - GNOME/nautilus Issue?

[Ow Mun Heng]

On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 18:35 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> > $ mount  | grep xfs
> > /dev/hda6 on /home type xfs (rw)
> 
> Hmm, I missed this before.  "nobarrier" should be showing up here.  Try:
> 
> mount /home -o remount,nobarrier
> 

I did mention that I tried that as well. (but I just re-tried it anyway)
and it didn't have any changes.

Out of curiousity, I just tried to copy a file using an xterm (instead
of using nautilus) from DIsk 2 to disk1

disk2/partition2 - VFAT
disk1/partition6 - XFS partition (/home)


$ ls -lah WinXP-000001-cl1-000001-cl1-000001-s002.vmdk           
-rwxrwxrwx  1 root root 620M Aug 29 19:10
WinXP-000001-cl1-000001-cl1-000001-s002.vmdk

$ time cp WinXP-000001-cl1-000001-cl1-000001-s001.vmdk ~/Desktop/
real    0m37.353s
user    0m0.157s
sys     0m5.445s


Transfer rate ~16.8MB/s

Using Nautilus (I don't know of a good way to measure throughput using
this, so it's basically what I see in the progress bar
~5min
gkrellm2 notes transfer rate ~2.0MB/s


However, doing the same thing to my /tmp directory (ext3 partition) the
same file copies in ~30secs and w/ ~17MB/s transfer rate.

What gives??


BTW, what's the difference between mc and mc-mp??

*  app-misc/mc
      Latest version available: 4.6.1
      Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
      Size of downloaded files: 11,606 kB
      Homepage:    http://www.ibiblio.org/mc/
      Description: GNU Midnight Commander cli-based file manager
      License:     GPL-2

*  app-misc/mc-mp [ Masked ]
      Latest version available: 4.1.40_pre9
      Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
      Size of downloaded files: 2,904 kB
      Homepage:    http://mc.linuxinside.com/cgi-bin/dir.cgi
      Description: GNU Midnight Commander cli-based file manager. 4.1.x
branch
      License:     GPL-2


> -Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes - GNOME/nautilus Issue?

[Joshua Schmidlkofer]

On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 18:35 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
> > On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> > > $ mount  | grep xfs
> > > /dev/hda6 on /home type xfs (rw)
> >
> > Hmm, I missed this before.  "nobarrier" should be showing up here.  Try:
> >
> > mount /home -o remount,nobarrier
> >
>
> I did mention that I tried that as well. (but I just re-tried it anyway)
> and it didn't have any changes.

I don't think it's a good idea.  Do you know what the write barriers
provide?   They give you a much higher chance of no damage if you are
able ot run with barriers.  The only real danger to an XFS partition
is out-of-order commits (and of course massive hardware failure).
Write barriers prevent out-of-order journal vs. FS commits, and that
is a Good Thing(tm).


They are only in as of 2.6.17 for XFS.

>
> Out of curiousity, I just tried to copy a file using an xterm (instead
> of using nautilus) from DIsk 2 to disk1
>
> disk2/partition2 - VFAT
> disk1/partition6 - XFS partition (/home)
>
>
> $ ls -lah WinXP-000001-cl1-000001-cl1-000001-s002.vmdk
> -rwxrwxrwx  1 root root 620M Aug 29 19:10
> WinXP-000001-cl1-000001-cl1-000001-s002.vmdk
>
> $ time cp WinXP-000001-cl1-000001-cl1-000001-s001.vmdk ~/Desktop/
> real    0m37.353s
> user    0m0.157s
> sys     0m5.445s
>
>
> Transfer rate ~16.8MB/s

I read an article recently (<2 years ago , heh)  about how Nautilus,
mc, Cp and other OSS copy utilities suffer from a lack of real
intuitive optimization work.  They highlighted the GNU cp command.
Overall copying with Linux tends to be lack luster.  It's services we
do well.  i.e. Http, SQL, etc.  So, that begs the question: Are there
any good, well optimized file copy utilities for Linux?

>
> Using Nautilus (I don't know of a good way to measure throughput using
> this, so it's basically what I see in the progress bar
> ~5min
> gkrellm2 notes transfer rate ~2.0MB/s
>
>
> However, doing the same thing to my /tmp directory (ext3 partition) the
> same file copies in ~30secs and w/ ~17MB/s transfer rate.
>
> What gives??
>
>
> BTW, what's the difference between mc and mc-mp??
>
> *  app-misc/mc
>       Latest version available: 4.6.1
>       Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
>       Size of downloaded files: 11,606 kB
>       Homepage:    http://www.ibiblio.org/mc/
>       Description: GNU Midnight Commander cli-based file manager
>       License:     GPL-2
>
> *  app-misc/mc-mp [ Masked ]
>       Latest version available: 4.1.40_pre9
>       Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
>       Size of downloaded files: 2,904 kB
>       Homepage:    http://mc.linuxinside.com/cgi-bin/dir.cgi
>       Description: GNU Midnight Commander cli-based file manager. 4.1.x
> branch
>       License:     GPL-2

>From the URL:
"The goal of this project is creating a stable, well-working, usefull
console-only version of well-known Midnight Commander, without bugs
and garbage, like tk, xv and gnome. I'm bored waiting for bugfixes,
and A'rpi's ESP team stops their work in this direction too, so I did
it. I'm fixing all (found) bugs, reported by my friends, and made some
really pleasent new features, like real-time clock, or filegroups
colorizing."

 Basically, this guy is sane, (thank God), and doing what MC really
needs: SIMPLICITY.  I have never bitched at the mc guys, but when I
get to my desk, I am converting to mc-mp.  Cause MC sucks recently.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes - GNOME/nautilus Issue? (SOLVED w/ ReFORMAT)

[Ow Mun Heng]

On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 09:38 -0700, Joshua Schmidlkofer wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:


I just re-formatted my partitions and moved things around. Things are
looking up.
Meaning, I am able to achieve good write/read speeds which is where i
was previously. 15-20MB/s on both writes/reads on btoh nautilus and cp
commands.

So. I'm gonna put it at either.

1. xfs frag
2. xfs dir curruption or something


> Are there
> any good, well optimized file copy utilities for Linux?
> >

Hmm.. interesting

> >
> > *  app-misc/mc
> >       Latest version available: 4.6.1
> >       Size of downloaded files: 11,606 kB
> > *  app-misc/mc-mp [ Masked ]
> >       Latest version available: 4.1.40_pre9

>  Basically, this guy is sane, (thank God), and doing what MC really
> needs: SIMPLICITY.  I have never bitched at the mc guys, but when I
> get to my desk, I am converting to mc-mp.  Cause MC sucks recently.

Well, if I look at the size of the tar, it's 5x difference

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Justin Piszcz]

nobarrier went into 2.6.17 I believe (kernel related change) and was 
discussed on the XFS mailing list.

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Mick wrote:

> On Wednesday 30 August 2006 02:35, Richard Fish wrote:
>> On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
>>> $ mount  | grep xfs
>>> /dev/hda6 on /home type xfs (rw)
>>
>> Hmm, I missed this before.  "nobarrier" should be showing up here.  Try:
>>
>> mount /home -o remount,nobarrier
>
> Where did you find this option?!  Couldn't see it in man mount . . .
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Mick
>
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] XFS FileSystem - Slow Writes

[Richard Fish]

On 8/30/06, Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 August 2006 02:35, Richard Fish wrote:
> > On 8/29/06, Ow Mun Heng <Ow.Mun.Heng@wdc.com> wrote:
> > > $ mount  | grep xfs
> > > /dev/hda6 on /home type xfs (rw)
> >
> > Hmm, I missed this before.  "nobarrier" should be showing up here.  Try:
> >
> > mount /home -o remount,nobarrier
>
> Where did you find this option?!  Couldn't see it in man mount . . .

http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/faq.html#wcache_fix

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list