As I understand it, simply increasing the maxdirsize
doesn't noticeably hurt things as much as
stuffing millions of files into a single directory can,
which is typically why one raises maxdirsize in the
first place. Lots of files in a single directory
hurts when you do things like ls -l or the equivlanet where
each directory entry causes a lookup of the corresponding
inode. WAFL handles this better than many
other filesystems out there, but it is possible to pound a
filer with these types of ops under these
conditions.
-- Adam Fox
adamfox@netapp.com
On a related note to the
conversation below - What's the impact to increasing maxdirsize on a given
volume? We have a qtree approaching the limit for its volume. Does
maxdirsize function like maxfiles/inodes?
Jeff Mery - MCSE, MCP
National
Instruments
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Allow
me to extol the virtues of the Net Fairy, and of all the fantastic
dorks that
make the nice packets go from here to there. Amen."
TB - Penny
Arcade
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Blake Golliher"
<thelastman@gmail.com>
Sent by: owner-toasters@mathworks.com
05/22/2007 11:40 AM
|
|
To
| "Fox, Adam"
<Adam.Fox@netapp.com>
|
|
cc
| "Magnus Swenson"
<magnuss@cadence.com>, toasters@mathworks.com
|
|
Subject
| Re: running out of inodes
problem |
|
Just add more with maxfiles, and ask about netapps plan to
adopt
dynamic inode allocation. Which there may not be, but one can
hope.
:) We have a data set that constantly runs out of inodes, we
just
keep a close eye on it, and add more inodes when needed. We've
not
had an issue with mysterious loss of performance when adding
inodes
using maxfiles.
hope that helps,
-Blake
On
5/22/07, Fox, Adam <Adam.Fox@netapp.com> wrote:
> It depends on why
you are running out of inodes. If your dataset
> uses lots of little
files, then increasing the disk space probably
> won't help much because
you'll end up having a lot of space sitting
> idle.
> If there are
just a few places in the data that have lots of inodes, but
> it's the
exception not the rule, then adding space will probably do the
>
trick.
>
> The only caveat with adding inodes is to add them as you
need them.
> Don't
> massively over-add inodes as you'll increase
some structures in the
> filesystem
> that could slow down your
performance unecessarily. Also keep in mind
> that
> once you
increase the inodes in a volume, they cannot be decreased.
>
> Just
some thoughts on the topic.
>
>
> -- Adam Fox
>
adamfox@netapp.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
From: Magnus Swenson [mailto:magnuss@cadence.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22,
2007 10:38 AM
> To: toasters@mathworks.com
> Subject: running out of
inodes problem
>
> Hello Toasters,
>
> Just wanted to do
a quick check, what the standard practise is when
> running out of inodes
on a volume.
>
> I have several flex volumes in one
aggregate.
> One of the volumes only at 80% full ran out of
inodes.
>
> df -i will show number of inodes used and inodes
free.
>
> This is a 100G volume with 3458831 inodes.
>
>
According to now.netapp.com, there are two solutions,
>
> increase
inodes with the 'maxfiles' command, or add more disk space to
> the
volume.
>
> Has anybody had experience with this and which way did
you go?
>