Hi,
Yep, that's what I'm leaning towards.
Faye
On 09/03/11 15:57, Steven Timm wrote:
> any reason you can't just turn hald off? Most servers don't need it.
>
> Steve Timm
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2011, Faye Gibbins wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've got one very special machine that has about 15,000 - 20,000
>> automount entries.
>>
>> Things are fine until about 5000 mount points are mounted up then any
>> further adding (in a tight bash loop) slows dramatically and hald
>> starts taking more and more CPU.
>> Memeory usage is well below physical ram, no swapping.
>>
>> Automount mounting slows to a few seconds per mount and the system
>> loads goes up and the machine slowly grinds to a halt.
>>
>> Running hald in foreground and in verbose mode I see lots and lots of
>> this type of messages:
>>
>> 12:46:01.254 [I] osspec.c:256: /proc/mounts tells, that the mount has
>> tree changed
>>
>> (process:10306): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_hash_table_lookup_extended:
>> assertion `hash_table != NULL' failed
>>
>> (process:10306): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_hash_table_lookup_extended:
>> assertion `hash_table != NULL' failed
>>
>> (process:10306): GLib-CRITICAL **: g_hash_table_lookup_extended:
>> assertion `hash_table != NULL' failed
>>
>> If anyone can shed some light on this it would make me very happy.
>>
>> It feels like when you see a search routine slow as n increases, is
>> hald or dbus using a flat directory somewhere as a hash table?
>>
>> Machine details:
>> SL5.5
>> 2.6.18-194.32.1.el5
>>
>> Faye
>>
>>
>>
>
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Faye Gibbins, Sys Admin. GeoS KB. Linux, Unix, Security
Beekeeper - The Apiary Project, KB - www.bees.ed.ac.uk
---------------------------------------------------------
(x(x_(X_x(O_o)x_x)_X)x)
I grabbed at spannungsbogen before I knew I wanted it.
Socrates: Question authority, question everything.
Mermin: If the maths works "Shut up and calculate!"
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body,
registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
|
