Re: Comparing XFS with ext3 and ReiserFS

[Juha Saarinen <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 6 May 2001, GCS wrote:

> other files. On the other hand, XFS is lazy to allocate inodes, and only
> get more (against free clusters to store the file itself) if it is
> necessary. The only drawback as I know, that XFS never gives back these
> inode clusters. This means, if you create millions of very small files,
> and after you delete them, you see your disk storage size shrink.

If that's correct, XFS would be less than ideal for e.g. a Squid or a news
volume.



-- 
Regards,


Juha

PGP fingerprint:
B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502  10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544