Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
49 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Anton Aylward-2
I've been using ReiserFS quite happily for many years now and I think it is one
of those software packages that was an excellent/genius design; it has needed
very little maintenance over the years.  The PowerThatBe, however, think that it
is 'unsupported' (actually it isn't, it just doesn't have the crowds that
theext4 does since it don't need much work, which to my mind reflects badly on
ext4) and so are depreciating it, especially with Leap-15.

ReiserFS does have the problem that it is single threaded, so I don't get the
best performance when I have so many file system running it :-(

I don't see reiser4 being merged in in teh foreseeable future.

So I'm looking to migrate to another obscure file system.  JFS.

I've used JFS extensively for many years (hmm over a decade) on IBM AIX
machines. (Where I always used it on top of LVM.) Like ReiserFS and XFS and
BtrFS it beaks away from the archaic model that goes back to the pre-networking
UNIX V6 days on the PDP-11 where the inode space and the data space blocks were
preallocated and fixed at MKFS time.  This idiocy is preserved even with ext4FS!
 All these late model file systems are based on B-tree models so there is no
reason why ext4FS should have this constraint.

My one question is about concurrency.
In some ways it a dumb question.  The Linux implementation of JFS was done by
IBM engineers so presumably it reflects the way the IBM AIX implementation
worked, but I can't find an explicit answer in the extensive AIX documentation I
have either.

Is JFS multi-threaded?

Please: no answers that are "Not invented here" & other prejudices.
Particularly Ext4, BtrFS and XFS.  "Comparisons are odious".
I'm also not interested in building my own kernel
https://reiser4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Reiser4_Howto

And please, this is a desktop, not a file server, so advantages such as dealing
with 16Tb files or file systems are of little importance, but the handling of
lots of smaller files (such as ReiserFS does very well) *IS* important.  That is
why I'm asking about multi-threading.  That's the ReiserFS limitation for me.


====================



--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Per Jessen
Anton Aylward wrote:

> So I'm looking to migrate to another obscure file system.  JFS.
>

My favourite.  Except for test systems with ext4, everything here is
JFS.  Has been since ... forever.  JFS v1.1 maybe.  

> I've used JFS extensively for many years (hmm over a decade) on IBM
> AIX machines.

The Linux variant of JFS is based on the JFS that was
re-developed/-written for OS/2.  

> My one question is about concurrency.
> In some ways it a dumb question.  The Linux implementation of JFS was
> done by IBM engineers so presumably it reflects the way the IBM AIX
> implementation worked, but I can't find an explicit answer in the
> extensive AIX documentation I have either.
>
> Is JFS multi-threaded?

What does that mean?

> And please, this is a desktop, not a file server, so advantages such
> as dealing with 16Tb files or file systems are of little importance,
> but the handling of
> lots of smaller files (such as ReiserFS does very well) *IS*
> important.  That is why I'm asking about multi-threading.  That's the
> ReiserFS limitation for me.

Sounds to me like you just ought to try it out. You're not making a
strategic decision for the future, you can always change to something
else.

JFS is a mature filesystem that just works and works and works.  IIRC,
Backblaze (storage provider) used to swear by JFS.


--
Per Jessen, Zürich (3.4°C)
http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Lew Wolfgang
On 01/15/2018 10:27 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
> Sounds to me like you just ought to try it out. You're not making a
> strategic decision for the future, you can always change to something
> else.
>
> JFS is a mature filesystem that just works and works and works.  IIRC,
> Backblaze (storage provider) used to swear by JFS.

Why would one select JFS before XFS for large RAID data storage? Arrays
larger than 50-TB, for example.

Regards,
Lew


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

James Knott
In reply to this post by Per Jessen
On 01/15/2018 01:27 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
> The Linux variant of JFS is based on the JFS that was
> re-developed/-written for OS/2.  

The version of JFS on Linux is JFS2, which appeared on OS/2 before AIX.
In the SCO owns Linux nonsense lawsuit, SCO tried to claim they owned
the JFS in Linux, because it was installed on AIX, IBM's Unix, and moved
illegally to Linux, ignoring the fact that it was on OS/2 first.  I
recall when JFS became available for OS/2, as I was working at IBM
Canada, providing 3rd level OS/2 support at the time.

BTW, I still have a bunch of Linux CDs, published by IBM back then.
Caldera was one of the included distros.  I was on an internal mailing
list for various CDs.  In addition to Linux, I received many others for
OS/2, Windows, DOS, AIX, mainframe and DB2, probably well over a hundred
CDs in total.  They pretty much fill a fairly large box.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Wol's lists
In reply to this post by Lew Wolfgang
On 15/01/18 18:33, Lew Wolfgang wrote:

> On 01/15/2018 10:27 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
>> Sounds to me like you just ought to try it out. You're not making a
>> strategic decision for the future, you can always change to something
>> else.
>>
>> JFS is a mature filesystem that just works and works and works.  IIRC,
>> Backblaze (storage provider) used to swear by JFS.
>
> Why would one select JFS before XFS for large RAID data storage? Arrays
> larger than 50-TB, for example.
>
Because that's not the problem.

ReiserFS is *very* good at dealing with lots of small files - something
which *most* filesystems have problems.

If you have a 50TB filesystem FULL of files with an average size of,
say, 4K, what will that do to XFS performance?

Cheers,
Wol

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Carlos E. R.-2
On 2018-01-15 20:22, Wol's lists wrote:

> On 15/01/18 18:33, Lew Wolfgang wrote:
>> On 01/15/2018 10:27 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
>>> Sounds to me like you just ought to try it out. You're not making a
>>> strategic decision for the future, you can always change to something
>>> else.
>>>
>>> JFS is a mature filesystem that just works and works and works.  IIRC,
>>> Backblaze (storage provider) used to swear by JFS.
>>
>> Why would one select JFS before XFS for large RAID data storage? Arrays
>> larger than 50-TB, for example.
>>
> Because that's not the problem.
>
> ReiserFS is *very* good at dealing with lots of small files - something
> which *most* filesystems have problems.
>
> If you have a 50TB filesystem FULL of files with an average size of,
> say, 4K, what will that do to XFS performance?
XFS can cope with that, but worse than Reiserfs.


Which makes me wonder: How difficult is for a user to use R4?

--
Cheers / Saludos,

                Carlos E. R.

  (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" (Minas Tirith))


signature.asc (220 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Knurpht-openSUSE
In reply to this post by James Knott
Op maandag 15 januari 2018 20:05:36 CET schreef James Knott:

> On 01/15/2018 01:27 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
> > The Linux variant of JFS is based on the JFS that was
> > re-developed/-written for OS/2.
>
> The version of JFS on Linux is JFS2, which appeared on OS/2 before AIX.
> In the SCO owns Linux nonsense lawsuit, SCO tried to claim they owned
> the JFS in Linux, because it was installed on AIX, IBM's Unix, and moved
> illegally to Linux, ignoring the fact that it was on OS/2 first.  I
> recall when JFS became available for OS/2, as I was working at IBM
> Canada, providing 3rd level OS/2 support at the time.
>
> BTW, I still have a bunch of Linux CDs, published by IBM back then.
> Caldera was one of the included distros.  I was on an internal mailing
> list for various CDs.  In addition to Linux, I received many others for
> OS/2, Windows, DOS, AIX, mainframe and DB2, probably well over a hundred
> CDs in total.  They pretty much fill a fairly large box.

Djeez, I never thought I'd see the name Caldera again. Don't remember why, but
my choice between S.u.S.E. and Caldera was won by S.u.S.E. . Caldera was
awesome though.

--
Gertjan Lettink, a.k.a. Knurpht

openSUSE Board Member
openSUSE Forums Team



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Anton Aylward-2
In reply to this post by Per Jessen
On 15/01/18 01:27 PM, Per Jessen wrote:

> Anton Aylward wrote:
>
>> So I'm looking to migrate to another obscure file system.  JFS.
>>
>
> My favourite.  Except for test systems with ext4, everything here is
> JFS.  Has been since ... forever.  JFS v1.1 maybe.  
>
>> I've used JFS extensively for many years (hmm over a decade) on IBM
>> AIX machines.
>
> The Linux variant of JFS is based on the JFS that was
> re-developed/-written for OS/2.  

As I understand it, that code base was then fed back into the development of
later model JFS for AIX and the Linux version is derived from that, concurrently
with the Linux-for-AIX version.

>> My one question is about concurrency.
>> [...]
>> Is JFS multi-threaded?
>
> What does that mean?

Well, by comparison,  ReiserFS isn't.
So if I have multiple ReiserFS partitions and am running, say, Thunderbird
storing on one, and it wakes up occasion ad gets mail and stores it there, and
I'm watching a movie that is on another partition that is also ReiserFS, while a
compile of a tree is going on in the background and the source and destination
are each on another partition and the binaries and libraries are on a third
partition and they are all ReiserFS, then there's only one thread and they are
blocking each other and overall performance sucks.

>
> JFS is a mature filesystem that just works and works and works.  IIRC,
> Backblaze (storage provider) used to swear by JFS.


I'm converting my "movies" and a few others and we'll see how it goes.




--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Anton Aylward-2
In reply to this post by Carlos E. R.-2
On 15/01/18 02:28 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> Which makes me wonder: How difficult is for a user to use R4?

I looked into that.
The patches for the kernel are up to date, you just need to get the source tree
and compile your own kernel - and keep that up to date.

--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Anton Aylward-2
In reply to this post by Wol's lists
On 15/01/18 02:22 PM, Wol's lists wrote:

> On 15/01/18 18:33, Lew Wolfgang wrote:
>> On 01/15/2018 10:27 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
>>> Sounds to me like you just ought to try it out. You're not making a
>>> strategic decision for the future, you can always change to something
>>> else.
>>>
>>> JFS is a mature filesystem that just works and works and works.  IIRC,
>>> Backblaze (storage provider) used to swear by JFS.
>>
>> Why would one select JFS before XFS for large RAID data storage? Arrays
>> larger than 50-TB, for example.
>>
> Because that's not the problem.
>
> ReiserFS is *very* good at dealing with lots of small files - something which
> *most* filesystems have problems.
>
> If you have a 50TB filesystem FULL of files with an average size of, say, 4K,
> what will that do to XFS performance?

I looked at the distribution of file sizes for my /etc (which is on a ext4 'cos
I can figure out the constraints there beforehand).
As you can see, the bulk of the file will fit in one sector and a significant
number can be packed or tail packed


File Size    # of files
         0   9
         1   1
         4   2
         8   8
        16  28
        32  57
        64 119
       128 200
       256 231
       512 248
      1024 258
      2048 235
      4096 123
      8192 144
     16384  49
     32768  85
     65536  10
    131072   6
    262144   2
    524288   4
   1048576   1
   2097152   1
   4194304   1


The numbers for my ~anton and my ~anton/Documents partitions are even more dramatic.

Packing (sharing a block) and inode packing are really going to be effective.

Why is this relevant?
=====================

Service providers such as the ones I use, Dreamhost, implement share account and
virtual machines on systems where users are going to have a lot of files like this.
The machines hosting the databases for the web services will be separate.

Does JFS do any form or 'packing'?


--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Carlos E. R.-2
In reply to this post by Anton Aylward-2
On 2018-01-16 03:25, Anton Aylward wrote:
> On 15/01/18 02:28 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>> Which makes me wonder: How difficult is for a user to use R4?
>
> I looked into that.
> The patches for the kernel are up to date, you just need to get the source tree
> and compile your own kernel - and keep that up to date.

That's a difficulty, because I have /usr/src/ on a reiserfs partition.


--
Cheers / Saludos,

                Carlos E. R.
                (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)


signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Anton Aylward-2
On 16/01/18 04:58 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> That's a difficulty, because I have /usr/src/ on a reiserfs partition.

Well you'll just have to convert that to JFS then, won't you :-)

--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Carlos E. R.-2
On 2018-01-16 15:41, Anton Aylward wrote:
> On 16/01/18 04:58 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> That's a difficulty, because I have /usr/src/ on a reiserfs partition.
>
> Well you'll just have to convert that to JFS then, won't you :-)

I don't plan on converting >;-)

--
Cheers / Saludos,

                Carlos E. R.

  (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" (Minas Tirith))


signature.asc (220 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS

Florian Gleixner
In reply to this post by Anton Aylward-2
On 15.01.2018 18:50, Anton Aylward wrote:
>
> Is JFS multi-threaded?

I think so:

# lvcreate -L 1G -n jfstest system
# mkfs.jfs /dev/system/jfstest
# mount /dev/system/jfstest /mnt
# ps -ef |grep jfs
root      5485     2  0 19:30 ?        00:00:00 [jfsIO]
root      5486     2  0 19:30 ?        00:00:00 [jfsCommit]
root      5487     2  0 19:30 ?        00:00:00 [jfsCommit]
root      5488     2  0 19:30 ?        00:00:00 [jfsCommit]
root      5489     2  0 19:30 ?        00:00:00 [jfsCommit]
root      5490     2  0 19:30 ?        00:00:00 [jfsSync]

I have 4 CPUs and there are some kernel threads for jfs. If i mount
another jfs filesystem, the number of kernel threads remains the same.
How JFS works with parallel workload, you will have to try yourself.


signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS PROBLEM

Anton Aylward-2
In reply to this post by Per Jessen
On 15/01/18 01:27 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
> Anton Aylward wrote:
>
>> So I'm looking to migrate to another obscure file system.  JFS.
>>
> My favourite.  Except for test systems with ext4, everything here is
> JFS.  Has been since ... forever.  JFS v1.1 maybe.  

I have a serious problem and it seems related to JFS

I have converted a couple of partitions to JFS, mostly large files, PDF document
movies/presentations.

They were mounted bt not being accessed.

I have firefox running and encounter a site that doesn't want to work with FF,
needs chromium.  Again, a presentation.  What I normally do in these
circumstances is copy the URL, start chromium in other  window inder KDE (I keep
a couple space just for this purpose) and view the rpesentation there.

I've done this many times.

Today I try it and my machine freezes.
The disk light comes on and stays on.
Mouse is unresponsive.

I hot key ctl-altF1 and log in as root.
Machine is unresponsive and I get "login timeout after 60 seconds"
before getting in as root.
The 'w' command tells me the load factor is in the 30s

I reboot the machine and try this all again.
Same result.
Frustrating.

So I reboot and this time I unmount the two JFS partitions.
I then start FF, copy the URL, start chromium, paste the URL
... and all works fine!

I suppose, ultimately, the question is not simply is it a problem with JSF, but
is it a problem with the scheduler?  Is it an interaction with the other FS drivers?

As advised by a page on JFS setup I have

# cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
noop [deadline] cfq


Has anyone observed this?  I'm not finding illumination with google but perhaps
my fu is off today as well.
Any ideas?





--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS PROBLEM

Dave Howorth-3
On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:02:47 -0500
Anton Aylward <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 15/01/18 01:27 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
> > Anton Aylward wrote:
> >  
> >> So I'm looking to migrate to another obscure file system.  JFS.
> >>  
> > My favourite.  Except for test systems with ext4, everything here is
> > JFS.  Has been since ... forever.  JFS v1.1 maybe.    
>
> I have a serious problem and it seems related to JFS
>
> I have converted a couple of partitions to JFS, mostly large files,
> PDF document movies/presentations.
>
> They were mounted bt not being accessed.
>
> I have firefox running and encounter a site that doesn't want to work
> with FF, needs chromium.  Again, a presentation.  What I normally do
> in these circumstances is copy the URL, start chromium in other
> window inder KDE (I keep a couple space just for this purpose) and
> view the rpesentation there.
>
> I've done this many times.
>
> Today I try it and my machine freezes.
> The disk light comes on and stays on.
> Mouse is unresponsive.
>
> I hot key ctl-altF1 and log in as root.
> Machine is unresponsive and I get "login timeout after 60 seconds"
> before getting in as root.
> The 'w' command tells me the load factor is in the 30s
>
> I reboot the machine and try this all again.
> Same result.
> Frustrating.
>
> So I reboot and this time I unmount the two JFS partitions.
> I then start FF, copy the URL, start chromium, paste the URL
> ... and all works fine!
>
> I suppose, ultimately, the question is not simply is it a problem
> with JSF, but is it a problem with the scheduler?  Is it an
> interaction with the other FS drivers?
>
> As advised by a page on JFS setup I have
>
> # cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
> noop [deadline] cfq
>
>
> Has anyone observed this?  I'm not finding illumination with google
> but perhaps my fu is off today as well.
> Any ideas?

Maybe version numbers for system, kernel, FF, chromium, JFS etc might
help. Also what process is causing that load factor?

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS PROBLEM

Anton Aylward-2
On 16/01/18 07:59 PM, Dave Howorth wrote:

>> So I reboot and this time I unmount the two JFS partitions.
>> I then start FF, copy the URL, start chromium, paste the URL
>> ... and all works fine!
>>
>> I suppose, ultimately, the question is not simply is it a problem
>> with JSF, but is it a problem with the scheduler?  Is it an
>> interaction with the other FS drivers?
>>
>> As advised by a page on JFS setup I have
>>
>> # cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
>> noop [deadline] cfq
>>
>>
>> Has anyone observed this?  I'm not finding illumination with google
>> but perhaps my fu is off today as well.
>> Any ideas?
> Maybe version numbers for system, kernel, FF, chromium, JFS etc might
> help. Also what process is causing that load factor?

Kernel 4.14.13-4 of Jan 12 from the kernel Stable repository
FF 52.2.0
chromium 63.0.3239.108-104.44.1  from openSUSE-Leap-42.2-Update

I'm presuming the jfs driver itself is from /lib/modules/
I run strings on that and don't find any version number

The jfsutil is 1.1.15-27.1
# fsck.jfs -V
fsck.jfs version 1.1.15, 04-Mar-2011

when I run search it seems that's the version for tumbleweed and 42.3 as well.


--
         A: Yes.
     >   Q: Are you sure?
     >>  A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
     >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS PROBLEM

Per Jessen
Anton Aylward wrote:

> On 16/01/18 07:59 PM, Dave Howorth wrote:
>>> So I reboot and this time I unmount the two JFS partitions.
>>> I then start FF, copy the URL, start chromium, paste the URL
>>> ... and all works fine!
>>>
>>> I suppose, ultimately, the question is not simply is it a problem
>>> with JSF, but is it a problem with the scheduler?  Is it an
>>> interaction with the other FS drivers?
>>>
>>> As advised by a page on JFS setup I have
>>>
>>> # cat /sys/block/sda/queue/scheduler
>>> noop [deadline] cfq
>>>
>>>
>>> Has anyone observed this?  I'm not finding illumination with google
>>> but perhaps my fu is off today as well.
>>> Any ideas?
>> Maybe version numbers for system, kernel, FF, chromium, JFS etc might
>> help. Also what process is causing that load factor?
>
> Kernel 4.14.13-4 of Jan 12 from the kernel Stable repository
> FF 52.2.0
> chromium 63.0.3239.108-104.44.1  from openSUSE-Leap-42.2-Update
>
> I'm presuming the jfs driver itself is from /lib/modules/
> I run strings on that and don't find any version number
>
> The jfsutil is 1.1.15-27.1
> # fsck.jfs -V
> fsck.jfs version 1.1.15, 04-Mar-2011
>
> when I run search it seems that's the version for tumbleweed and 42.3
> as well.

Yes, 1.15 is the latest version.  I have no idea what the problem might
be, but given that it is reproducable, you ought to have a good chance
of diagnosing it.




--
Per Jessen, Zürich (4.2°C)
http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS PROBLEM

Wol's lists
In reply to this post by Dave Howorth-3
On 17/01/18 00:59, Dave Howorth wrote:
> Maybe version numbers for system, kernel, FF, chromium, JFS etc might
> help. Also what process is causing that load factor?

How does one find that out? (the load factor, that is.) My SUSE laptop
takes ages to boot, and as part of the boot process it fires up xosview.
That tells me that the load factor is often maybe 6, a bit lower,
whatever. On a twin core processor, as you can guess, it takes ages for
the laptop to become responsive.

My gentoo desktop almost never goes over 2 during boot, and on three
cores, that's fine.

Cheers,
Wol

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Question (just one) about moving from ReiserFS to JFS PROBLEM

Dave Howorth-3
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018 14:11:03 +0000
Wols Lists <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 17/01/18 00:59, Dave Howorth wrote:
> > Maybe version numbers for system, kernel, FF, chromium, JFS etc
> > might help. Also what process is causing that load factor?  
>
> How does one find that out? (the load factor, that is.)

Generally, I just use top. There may be better ways.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

123