Hi!
I've got a fileserver currently running under 5.3 with the /home-partition being an XFS-filesystem. I use the kmod-xfs from extras. It works great ;)
Now: as I understand it from the release-notes the 5.4 kernel has XFS already built-in. Right? Or is it just a kmod-package ("technology preview")
Now my question is: are there any recommendations for an upgrade-procedure? I mean, I can probably manage, but I'll want to minimize downtime
Bernhard
BTW: when doing "yum list updates" I don't see any "kernel*"-packages in the list. Is this because the last kernel from the 5.3-updates has the same build-numer (164 I think)? And is the 5.4-base-kernel the same as the latest 5.3-updates-kernel?
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Bernhard Gschaider bgschaid_lists@ice-sf.at wrote:
I've got a fileserver currently running under 5.3 with the /home-partition being an XFS-filesystem. I use the kmod-xfs from extras. It works great ;)
Now: as I understand it from the release-notes the 5.4 kernel has XFS already built-in. Right? Or is it just a kmod-package ("technology preview")
Now my question is: are there any recommendations for an upgrade-procedure? I mean, I can probably manage, but I'll want to minimize downtime
BTW: when doing "yum list updates" I don't see any "kernel*"-packages in the list. Is this because the last kernel from the 5.3-updates has the same build-numer (164 I think)? And is the 5.4-base-kernel the same as the latest 5.3-updates-kernel?
The -164 kernel is indeed from 5.4 and has xfs as a built-in kernel module. If you are already running this kernel, that indicates all is well and no further action is needed.
Could you show us the output returned by:
ls -l `find /lib/modules -name xfs.ko`
Akemi
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Akemi Yagi amyagi@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Bernhard Gschaider
The -164 kernel is indeed from 5.4 and has xfs as a built-in kernel module. If you are already running this kernel, that indicates all is well and no further action is needed.
In that note, I assumed your kernel was x86_64...
Akemi
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:36:06 -0700 "AY" == Akemi Yagi amyagi@gmail.com wrote:
AY> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Bernhard Gschaider AY> bgschaid_lists@ice-sf.at wrote:
>> I've got a fileserver currently running under 5.3 with the >> /home-partition being an XFS-filesystem. I use the kmod-xfs >> from extras. It works great ;) >> >> Now: as I understand it from the release-notes the 5.4 kernel >> has XFS already built-in. Right? Or is it just a kmod-package >> ("technology preview") >> >> Now my question is: are there any recommendations for an >> upgrade-procedure? I mean, I can probably manage, but I'll want >> to minimize downtime
>> BTW: when doing "yum list updates" I don't see any >> "kernel*"-packages in the list. Is this because the last kernel >> from the 5.3-updates has the same build-numer (164 I think)? >> And is the 5.4-base-kernel the same as the latest >> 5.3-updates-kernel?
AY> The -164 kernel is indeed from 5.4 and has xfs as a built-in AY> kernel module. If you are already running this kernel, that AY> indicates all is well and no further action is needed.
AY> Could you show us the output returned by:
AY> ls -l `find /lib/modules -name xfs.ko`
Thanks for the hint: I did it (I'll spare you the listing). The -164-kernel ist the first one where according to "rpm -qf <path>" the module is "owned" by the kernel package. All the other instances of xfs.ko point to a module "owned" by kmod-xfs.
So obviously I'm not using the kmod-xfs anymore (I'm relieved that the last kernel-update worked without a clash)
Thanks again for clearing that up
Bernhard
BTW: yes. It is a x86_64-machine
On Oct 22, 2009, at 7:11 AM, Bernhard Gschaider <bgschaid_lists@ice-sf.at
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:36:06 -0700 "AY" == Akemi Yagi amyagi@gmail.com wrote:
AY> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Bernhard Gschaider AY> bgschaid_lists@ice-sf.at wrote:
I've got a fileserver currently running under 5.3 with the /home-partition being an XFS-filesystem. I use the kmod-xfs from extras. It works great ;)
Now: as I understand it from the release-notes the 5.4 kernel has XFS already built-in. Right? Or is it just a kmod-package ("technology preview")
Now my question is: are there any recommendations for an upgrade-procedure? I mean, I can probably manage, but I'll want to minimize downtime
BTW: when doing "yum list updates" I don't see any "kernel*"-packages in the list. Is this because the last kernel from the 5.3-updates has the same build-numer (164 I think)? And is the 5.4-base-kernel the same as the latest 5.3-updates-kernel?
AY> The -164 kernel is indeed from 5.4 and has xfs as a built-in AY> kernel module. If you are already running this kernel, that AY> indicates all is well and no further action is needed.
AY> Could you show us the output returned by:
AY> ls -l `find /lib/modules -name xfs.ko`
Thanks for the hint: I did it (I'll spare you the listing). The -164-kernel ist the first one where according to "rpm -qf <path>" the module is "owned" by the kernel package. All the other instances of xfs.ko point to a module "owned" by kmod-xfs.
So obviously I'm not using the kmod-xfs anymore (I'm relieved that the last kernel-update worked without a clash)
Thanks again for clearing that up
Bernhard
BTW: yes. It is a x86_64-machine
What version of XFS is supplied?
Is it still true that RH doesn't supply xfsprogs and xfsdump so we need to use the ones in 'extras'?
If so, wouldn't it be risky using the RH supplied kernel driver with third party supplied maintenance apps in case RH were to backport any XFS internal structs that the user progs don't know how to handle, or vice versa.
I think I'll stick with the complete CentOS XFS bundle for a while and see what RH does.
-Ross
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
thus Ross Walker spake: | On Oct 22, 2009, at 7:11 AM, Bernhard Gschaider <bgschaid_lists@ice-sf.at | > wrote: | |>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:36:06 -0700 |>>>>>> "AY" == Akemi Yagi amyagi@gmail.com wrote: |> AY> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Bernhard Gschaider |> AY> bgschaid_lists@ice-sf.at wrote: |> |>>> I've got a fileserver currently running under 5.3 with the |>>> /home-partition being an XFS-filesystem. I use the kmod-xfs |>>> from extras. It works great ;) |>>> |>>> Now: as I understand it from the release-notes the 5.4 kernel |>>> has XFS already built-in. Right? Or is it just a kmod-package |>>> ("technology preview") |>>> |>>> Now my question is: are there any recommendations for an |>>> upgrade-procedure? I mean, I can probably manage, but I'll want |>>> to minimize downtime |>>> BTW: when doing "yum list updates" I don't see any |>>> "kernel*"-packages in the list. Is this because the last kernel |>>> from the 5.3-updates has the same build-numer (164 I think)? |>>> And is the 5.4-base-kernel the same as the latest |>>> 5.3-updates-kernel? |> AY> The -164 kernel is indeed from 5.4 and has xfs as a built-in |> AY> kernel module. If you are already running this kernel, that |> AY> indicates all is well and no further action is needed. |> |> AY> Could you show us the output returned by: |> |> AY> ls -l `find /lib/modules -name xfs.ko` |> |> Thanks for the hint: I did it (I'll spare you the listing). The |> -164-kernel ist the first one where according to "rpm -qf <path>" the |> module is "owned" by the kernel package. All the other instances of |> xfs.ko point to a module "owned" by kmod-xfs. |> |> So obviously I'm not using the kmod-xfs anymore (I'm relieved that the |> last kernel-update worked without a clash) |> |> Thanks again for clearing that up |> |> Bernhard |> |> BTW: yes. It is a x86_64-machine | | What version of XFS is supplied? | | Is it still true that RH doesn't supply xfsprogs and xfsdump so we | need to use the ones in 'extras'?
http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS5.4#head-29511ff6659f6463d...
| If so, wouldn't it be risky using the RH supplied kernel driver with | third party supplied maintenance apps in case RH were to backport any | XFS internal structs that the user progs don't know how to handle, or | vice versa. | | I think I'll stick with the complete CentOS XFS bundle for a while and | see what RH does. | | -Ross
Timo
-
Akemi Yagi -
Bernhard Gschaider -
Ross Walker -
Timo Schoeler