xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS for Linux 1.0.1 Released

To: Steve Wolfe <nw@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS for Linux 1.0.1 Released
From: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:45:49 +0200
>received: from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B50B357306; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 08:55:01 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: Sauter AG, Basel
References: <200107102103.f6AL3am18531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20010711105428.A21601@xxxxxxxxx> <3B4C18A3.185769CD@xxxxxxxxxx> <3B4C6BFF.5939F32D@xxxxxxx> <3B4CBA71.D1D4E781@xxxxxxxxxx> <000f01c10a4a$413a9320$50824e40@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Steve Wolfe schrieb:
> 
> > > RPM kernel upgrades have always worked fine for me, just do an
> "rpm -i"
> > > (as opposed to -U, so you keep your old kernel around for good
> measure),
> > > then set up lilo to point to the new kernel image.
> 
>   At the risk of starting a flame-war, I avoid RedHat's "standard" kernels
> like the plague, as my network throughput is significantly slower.  My
> compiling a kernel with exactly what I need, I get a much higher
> throughput - along the order of several megabytes per second.  With
> everything that they enable in their kernels, I imagine that other aspects
> would also suffer.  Whether that extra bit of performance is necessary
> depends, of course, on your situation.  YMMV.
> 
> steve

I like the RH kernels, because of all the features they include. And I
never got bad network throughput with them. Do you have Gigabit Ethernet
where you have slow throughput? I have lots of servers here with all
kind
of different NIC's and I have never had a speed problem on the network.
The only problem I remember was when sombody changed the switch config
from autosensing/autoselect to fixed 100mb/FD. This has just killed
throughput on several NIC's.

Simon



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>