[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]


On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Theodore Tso wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 20, 2001 at 04:13:33PM +0200, David GXmez wrote:
> >
> > LVM is not the cause of the problem. I also had the same problem: a fsck
> > on an ext3 partition, lots of errors, and next time the only thing that
> > left on the partition was a lost+found directory with the remains of what
> > was my ext3 filesystem.
> >
> > I was using 2.4.10 when this happened, maybe is this the problem? Jason?
> >
> Using 2.4.10 is almost certainly a bad move, and probably was
> responsible for your lossage.  Quite frankly, at the moment all of my
> production machines are running 2.4.9 with ext3, and it's quite
> stable; I'm not sure I trust any of the more recent kernels at this
> point (due the VM code, not the ext3 code).  Of course, I don't trust the
> LVM code at all, regardless of kernel version, but that probably has
> something to do with the fact that when I looked at the code, I wasn't
> impressed by the overall code quality....


You haven't been having any trouble with excessive swap usage under 2.4.9?
I found it stable, but it did very odd things when left up on my server
for any length of time.  Almost acted like a kernel memory leak.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]