[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: amanda vs 2.6
On Thursday 27 November 2003 08:39, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 27, 2003 at 05:05:50AM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> My $0.02, but performance like that would scare a new user right
>> back to winderz.
>> Around here, its thanksgiving day, and we traditionally eat way
>> too much turkey (or something like that :) And then complain
>> about the weight we've gained of course...
>This isn't a performance problem. This is a bug. It vaguely sounds
> like a missed wakeup or missing setting of TIF_NEED_RESCHED, but
> could be a number of other things too.
>(The missing setting of TIF_NEED_RESCHED theory is right if it's
>possible to clean up after it by ignoring need_resched() in the
>scheduler and always rescheduling.)

Well, running 2.6.0-test11, I just discovered I'm back to being unable
to 'su amanda' again. It worked the first time, but I got rejected
frorm unpacking the lastest amanda-2.4.4p1-20031126.tar.gz due to a
lack of permissions, so I exited, chowned the archive to what it was
supposed to be, but cannot now do another su amanda in order to start
the install of this latest snapshot.

The process just hangs, never comeing back to a prompt. I never had
any troubles with that useing test9, so I guess its reboot time

However, IMO this is a major problem, and needs fixed before 2.6.0.

Cheers, Gene
AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M
99.27% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly attornies please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2003 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.093 / U:1.264 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site