Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 17:23:52 -0400 From: Stephan Uphoff <ups@tree.com> To: Dario Freni <saturnero@freesbie.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [saturnero@freesbie.org: Weird behaviour of mount_unionfs with executables] Message-ID: <1120425831.77984.37993.camel@palm> In-Reply-To: <20050703201621.GD89744@cvs.freesbie.org> References: <20050703181616.GC89744@cvs.freesbie.org> <42C83643.4010506@samsco.org> <20050703201621.GD89744@cvs.freesbie.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I suspect the changes in revision 1.272 of kern_exec.c trigger the copy operation. Looks like you need a noatime option for union_fs. Stephan On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 16:16, Dario Freni wrote: > On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 01:02:27PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > > >I'm also afraid that copying files to the upper layer also when > > >they're not modified could fill up our mfs entirely. I'm almost sure > > >there's a totally different behaviour under RELENG_5, as we haven't > > >encountered such problems. > > > > > > > > > > You might very well have found a bug in the vnode pager. I take it that > > this doesn't happen on 5-STABLE, correct? > > Correct. I'm sure that from 5.4-RELEASE to -STABLE unionfs work as > expected for me. The very strange thing is that a recalled file is > copied (with fixed permissions) to the upper layer even if it wasn't > modified. In my case, the upper layer is a mdmfs, so it will be surely > filled up to its entire size after running executables for a total > amount of 32Mb. Quite boring. > > Bye, > Dario
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1120425831.77984.37993.camel>