On 5 Mar 2008, at 10:06, Michael Grant wrote:
> My server just literally was brought to it's knees with this message
> spewing on the console:
>
> swap_pager: indefinite wait buffer: bufobj: 0, blkno: 1203133, size:
> 4096
>
> (blkno and size were varying)
>
> Some searching says that this is or was a bug. Has this been fixed
> yet? If so, what should I upgrade to? I'm currently running 6.3
You may consider partition backed swap instead of file backed swap if
that is the case.
>
>
> Michael Grant
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stabl...@freebsd.org
> "
- Ruben
--Apple-Mail-39-918736181
content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453;
name=PGP.sig
content-description: This is a digitally signed message part
content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFHznEnZ88+mcQxRw0RAjfBAJ45pMji62e2ISa0iUcviSaLyJRJZgCff1AD
hptHAVmIELDIxiQIXNPMQ5A=
=1/tN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail-39-918736181--
Hmm, I can't easily do that, I didn't leave any empty partitions
around as I never considered swapping to a file to be a so bad.
Is swapping to a file so bad under normal conditions?
Does this mean that this bug is still not fixed in 7.0?
Is there any way to do anything akin to Partition Magic on ufs to
shrink the fs? (not sure if it's ufs1 or ufs2, mount reports it as
'ufs').
The message indicates that it took >30 seconds to complete an operation,
so it was timed out assuming the I/O was lost by the device.
In your case it was probably not lost, just delayed for more than 30
seconds by an overloaded filesystem.
> Does this mean that this bug is still not fixed in 7.0?
It's not clear whether it's a bug or your disk is just too overloaded to
complete the filesystem operation in a reasonable time period (swapping
to a file is slower than swapping to a partition, which is already
something you never want to do in normal operation). You can increase
the timeout by editing the kernel.
Kris