On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 10:24:54AM -0300, Gabriel B. wrote:
> Also, what about the LOG? it's used just by the transactions right? if
> i understood what i read from the docs, since i only work with small
> files i should be more than safe with the 20M, right?

RVM log should be at least as big as the largest single transaction. I
don't really know what the largest possible transaction is, but we
really only use RVM for metadata (attributes) and directories, so I
assume that 20MB should be safe. The largest transactions I've ever seen
were when RVM tried to do some last resort internal RVM data
defragmentation. But since then a lot of things have changed, we have
an improved allocation strategy and are already defragmentating a bit
whenever bits of RVM memory are released.

On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 10:32:35AM -0300, Gabriel B. wrote:
> > btw. if you are copying in an existing tree of data, give rvmsizer a
> > try. It should be in either /usr/bin or /usr/sbin on the server and
> > works like a df, but gives an estimate on how much RVM would be needed
> > and whether there are any directories that might give you a problem.
> 
> Hum, i runned it today in /vicepa, after a night of filling one of the
> big volumes (without errors this time)
> 
> 1066 directories, 271316 files, 6385 directory pages
> total file size        5990373849 bytes (5712.87MB)
> average file size      22078 bytes
> total directory size   8716348 bytes (8.31MB)
> average directory size 8176 bytes
> estimated RVM usage based on object counts, 48900776 bytes (46.64MB)
> estimated RVM usage based on 4% rule,       239963607 bytes (228.85MB)
> 
> I already have seven more dirs as full as this one, each has it's own
> volume on the same vicepa partition. if this will one eat 230MB of the
> rmv, 230 * 7= 1610
> So, i'd need 1.6GB?

No, the 4% rule is what we used to recommend, however the usage based on
object counts is the precise amount you need to store the given tree.

Ofcourse you are not supposed to run it over the /vicepa partition,
since that doesn't give us any useful directory information (directories
are store in RVM, now we just see the file data, so we can only assume
that the # of files and the total file size is correct, but the # of
directory pages and everything else is useless. /vicepa just has a lot
of directories with 1 or 2 letter filenames. In reality your RVM usage
should be quite a bit more that this estimate of 46MB.

If you run it over the original data you copied into /coda (or on the
data already in /coda) you shouldget some more realistic numbers.

Jan