Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Aug 9, 2008, at 11:21 AM, Casey Allen Shobe wrote: > * Maybe JFS is a bad choice to use on top of DRBD (kind of doubt it) > and we should use another filesystem who's disk accesses match > DRBD's expectations better. After sending this E-mail, I decided to mkfs.ext3 the partition (with DRBD slave connected). It got to the "writing inode tables" part, shot up to 1200 pretty fast and then stuck. It's now been CRAWLING along at a snail's pace for a good 10 minutes now, and is not yet up to 2000 (out of 5465, so I expect it will be the better part of an hour or more before it completes, which seems absolutely absurd for an mkfs). Additionally, I tried disconnecting the slave midway through and speed did not improve. So the problem seems lower-level than the filesystem (just wanted to rule that out). It also seems, since performance is terrible even when the slave is disconnected, that the network is not a factor. The mkfs alone is pushing the server load up to 3.0, however the CPU utilization is sticking at 0%, so CPU does not seem to be a factor either. Cheers, -- Casey Allen Shobe Database Architect, The Berkeley Electronic Press cshobe at bepress.com (email/jabber/aim/msn) http://www.bepress.com | +1 (510) 665-1200 x163 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20080809/c416627c/attachment.htm>