[Lustre-discuss] e2fsck-wc4 speed

Brian J. Murrell brian at whamcloud.com
Thu Jul 5 11:31:00 PDT 2012

On 12-07-05 02:20 PM, Samuel Aparicio wrote:
> I wonder if using a scratch file would be any faster than having the system do the paging.

At least with ext4, not in my experience.  I had a machine with a 1TB
(very close to) full ext4 filesystem that I needed to fsck.
Unfortunately this machine was still on a 32-bit kernel so, other than
trying to shoehorn the 64-bit kernel in the only way I could fsck was to
use scratch files since the data structures were too big to fit into the
32-bit architecture's available memory.

I ended up giving up on using scratch files after a day or so of fsck
running and shoehorned the 64-bit kernel in so that it could all be done
in memory.  It only took a few hours at that point.


Brian J. Murrell
Senior Software Engineer
Whamcloud, Inc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20120705/1dfa7221/attachment.pgp>

More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list