On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 12:19 +0000, Bryn M. Reeves wrote: > On Sun, 2010-02-07 at 17:32 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > After reducing my RAM to 2GB via the mem= boot option (see parallel > > branch of this thread) I don't seem to be getting memory errors, but I > > still have problems, apparently with NFS. I've posted a trace from > > dmesg to http://fpaste.org/eEh6/ > > That sounds a bit like: > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/30419 > > and: > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.nfs/30437 > > There's a patch in the first link which I don't think is in the kernel > you're running; could be worth a look if you are seeing this regularly. Only a couple of times, but of course I'll keep an eye on it. > > The scenario is that I'm using rsync to an NFS-mounted directory as a > > backup method. I had previously tried rsyncing directly to the server > > (an Iomega ix2-200 desktop NAS), but it's unbelievably slow in this > > configuration. I measured 100-300Kbps doing it this way -- which would > > take well over a day to run my initial full backup job), versus at least > > an order of magnitude faster running rsync over NFS. I conjecture that > > the NAS cpu just isn't up to calculating the rsync checksums fast enough > > to keep up with a 100Mbps LAN. > > Is the box under memory pressure while doing this workload with mem=2g? > That would tend to support the idea that you're seeing the above problem > since it's been reported to occur under low memory conditions. Very possibly. I was (rashly) trying to run a VBox VM at the same time and I could see more than 50% of swap was committed. Load average was over 20! poc -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
