Hi all, For those of you that have been using the ext4 technology preview on CentOS 5.5, how has it panned out? Does it perform as expected? How do you feel the stability, creation of the FS and the administration of it is? Ideas and comments welcome. Thanks. -- BW, Sorin ----------------------------------------------------------- # Sorin Srbu [Sysadmin, Systems Engineer] # Dept of Medicinal Chemistry, Phone: +46 (0)18-4714482 >3 signals> GSM # Div of Org Pharm Chem, Mobile: +46 (0)701-718023 # Box 574, Uppsala University, Fax: +46 (0)18-4714482 # SE-751 23 Uppsala, Sweden Visit: BMC, Husargatan 3, D5:512b # Web: http://www.orgfarm.uu.se ----------------------------------------------------------- # () ASCII ribbon campaign - Against html E-mail # /\ # # MotD follows: # Legacy MS Tag: Windows has crashed more systems than Michelangelo. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5110 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110127/380584c3/attachment-0002.bin>
On 27 January 2011 15:06, Sorin Srbu <sorin.srbu at orgfarm.uu.se> wrote:> Hi all, > > For those of you that have been using the ext4 technology preview on CentOS > 5.5, how has it panned out? Does it perform as expected? How do you feel the > stability, creation of the FS and the administration of it is? Ideas and > comments welcome. >Well for what it's worth it worked out well enough for Redhat that it is a fully supported filesystem in 5.6 and the default in 6.0... same admin tools as ext3 so not much to learn as it were...
>For those of you that have been using the ext4 technology preview on CentOS5.5, how has it panned out? Does it perform as expected? How do you feel the stability, creation of the FS and the administration of it is? Ideas and comments welcome. I've recently been using ext4 because I have servers with large(ish) storage volumes, and because I know that the next version of centos will support it better than 5.5. I only use it for storage, where I use rsync to copy terabytes of data to and from the servers. It works fine - it's been set and forget so far. Very fast read/write speeds.
Sorin Srbu wrote: <snip>> Anyway, I get a bad block message when running fsck, and am not sure > whether this is a interface problem between the chair and the monitor or > something with the tech preview.<snip> Having just live through this issue, I recommend you run the extended (long) SMART test on all your drives and check the reports. The relevant package to install is smartmontools. It's worth investing a little time in setting up the package. I ended up with this incantation in /etc/smartd.conf : /dev/hda -T normal -p -a -o on -S on -s (S/../.././02|L/../../6/03) -m root at localhost To execute the extended tests (doesn't mess with your data): # smartctl --test=long /dev/hda To view the test results about 80 minutes later: # smartctl --log=selftest /dev/hda and so on. -- Charles Polisher