search for: dir_indexes

Hi, I stumbled on the dir_index option of recent ext2 implementation which would be interesting for our mailservers (running dovecot with maildir) and found out that the newer ext2progs are able to cope with it; the 2.6 kernels do also but for the 2.4 kernels I still require a patch. Is that correct? Which patch would be the correct one to apply to the current 2.4.27 kernel ? Can anybody

Hi, I enabled dir_index on a filesystem and dumpe2fs -h also reports this. My understanding is that this will be used for newly created directories and that old directories can be indexed using "fsck.ext2 -D". Two questions: - Is there a way to tell is a given directory is indexed or not? - Is there a better way to index the root fs than to boot off a live CD? Best, Norbert

In 1.6.0, when creating a MDT, you could specify multiple --mgsnode options and it would failover between them. 1.6.3 only seems to take the last one and --mgsnode=192.168.1.252 at o2ib:192.168.1.253 at o2ib doesn''t seem to failover to the other node. Any ideas how to get around this? Robert Robert LeBlanc College of Life Sciences Computer Support Brigham Young University leblanc at

I hope this is the right list. I have created an ext2 filesystem and removed the dir_index feature. I don't know if this kind of experimentation is going to help me learn something about filesystems or not. Well what is dir_index? Then I ran e2fsck -f -v -pD and the /dev file. Now what did I remove? Htree. I guess it can always be put back and it's on an experimental filesystem.

Peter Kjellstr?m wrote: > On Monday 23 January 2006 16:46, Plant, Dean wrote: >> I need to downgrade a system from Centos x4.2 to v3.6 (x86) due to >> performance problems with Arkeia Network Backup and AIT-4 tape >> drives. The backup database is stored on a v4.2 created ext3 >> partition. When accessing this partition after the downgrade, Centos >> complains on

I've been thinking recently that we should re-enable DIR_INDEX in mke2fs by default. When it first came out, we had done this and were bitten by a few bugs in the code. However, this code has been in heavy use for several thousand filesystem years in Lustre, if not elsewhere, and I'm inclined to think it is pretty safe these days. Likewise, RHEL/FC have had RESIZE_INODE as a standard

Hi, is it save to use ext2 / ext3 hashed b-trees feature with linux kernel >= 2.4.25 ? thanx, Gregor -- echo '16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D3F204445524F42snlbxq'|dc

I decided that I would try out 2.5.44, and I noticed that htree was merged. If I don't do the tune2fs -O dir_index, and e2fsck -D, the (exisintg) fs won't use htree, right? Once I do the tune2fs and e2fsck, will I still be able to go back to a non-htree kernel if needed? (Will a htree-ized fs work on a non-htree kernel?) I'm guessing that it won't. I've seen a 2.4 htree

* "Bill Cunningham" <billcun@suddenlink.net> hat geschrieben: > I hope this is the right list. I have created an ext2 filesystem and > removed the dir_index feature. I don't know if this kind of experimentation > is going to help me learn something about filesystems or not. Well what is > dir_index? Then I ran e2fsck -f -v -pD and the /dev file. Now what did I >

Hi, I've installed a few Fedora Core 4 and Fedora Core 5 recently, and found that the new ext3 file systems created with new mkfs.ext3(1.38+) has one more field than EXT3 created with old mkfs.ext3(1.34-), even the latter's dir_index feature was turned on and file systems were upgraded with "e2fsck -y -f -D" command. I have three questions thereafter: 1) what does the

Try using $PWD/test.cpp on the clang command line. I am seeing the duplicate DIFile entries, but not yet able to reproduce a .debug_line section with multiple directory entries. --paulr From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Tomar, Sourabh Singh via llvm-dev Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 1:07 PM To: Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com>; cfe-dev at

This may or may not be ext3 related but I am trying to find any pointers which might help me. I got a number of HP Proliant DL380 g5 with a P400 controller and also two qla2400 cards. The OS is RedHat EL4 U5 x86_64. Every time during reboot these systems panic after the last umount and I believe before the cciss driver is getting unloaded. The last messages I am able to see are: md: stopping

Dear all, I am trying to train a randomForest using all my control data (12,000 cases, ~ 20 explanatory variables, 2 classes). Because of memory constraints, I have split my data into 7 subsets and trained a randomForest for each, hoping that using combine() afterwards would solve the memory issue. Unfortunately, combine() still runs out of memory. Is there anything else I can do? (I am not using

I'm setting up a new fileserver. It has two RAID controllers, a PERC 3/DI providing mirrored system disks and a PERC 3/DC providing a 1TB RAID5 volume consisting of eight 144GB U160 drives. This will serve NFS, Samba and sftp clients for about 200 users. The logical drive was created with the following settings: RAID = 5 stripe size = 32kb write policy = wrback read policy =

Hi All , We have a scenario in our debugger to handle the file index in the debug_ine info like $llvm-dwarfdump -debug-line test.o file_names[ 1]: name: "test.cpp" dir_index: 0 mod_time: 0x00000000 length: 0x00000000 file_names[ 2]: name: "test.cpp" dir_index: 1 mod_time: 0x00000000 length: 0x00000000

Hi Guys, I am planning on upgrading an existing NFS exported filesystem to the ext3 htree patch on kernel v2.4.23. Will the patch index directories automatically after tune2fs -O dir_index or should I do an e2fsck -Dfy on the filesystem before remounting?

Hi all, I issued the commands on a single disk system: with two partitions / is linux sda1 and /home is sda3 yum -y update yum -y install e4fsprogs reboot umount /home tune2fs -O extents,uninit_bg,dir_index /dev/sda3 e2fsck -yfDC0 /dev/sda3 That worked just fine. I then had a different system that is software raid. where / is linux and md0 and /home is md1 yum -y update yum -y

Currently the fs sync function (super.c:btrfs_sync_fs()) doesn''t wait for delayed work to finish before returning success to the caller. This change fixes this, ensuring that there''s no data loss if a power failure happens right after fs sync returns success to the caller and before the next commit happens. Steps to reproduce the data loss issue: $ mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sdb3 $

Hi, I have two 3TB (hardware RAID-5) ext3 filesystems and recently added 1TB to each. I resized each filesystem and e2fsck -f reports that both are fine. However, when I look at the ext3 parameters with tune2fs -l one seems to have some parameters that the other one doesn't. In particular, one has: "Reserved GDT blocks", "Filesystem created", "Default directory

I am running into performance issues with ext3. Historically we had our image files (pictures of cars, currently 5.3 million) sub divided into a directory structure [0-9]/[0-9]/[0-9]/[0-9], where we would take the first 4 letters/numbers of the file name and use that to put it into this structure. Letters [a-cA-C] would become a 0, [d-fD-F] a 1, etc. As the file names used to be based on VIN