xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: best kernel version to use with XFS+LVM+MD

To: "mai99bxd" <mai99bxd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: best kernel version to use with XFS+LVM+MD
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 23:00:41 +0100
In-reply-to: <002201c1b31c$75c02f30$0b00a8c0@alex>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 17:52 11-2-2002 +0100, mai99bxd wrote:
Hi all,

I'm going to plan a fileserver with 2 45Gb IDE disks in soft RAID1 and 4
100GB IDE disks in soft RAID5. I would take the RAID1 for system and the
RAID5 for storage. The 300GB RADI5 space should be divided by LVM into
some XFS filesystems. I also use NFS and Samba over the XFS.

Make sure that you make the log of the raid5 volume external and preferably on the raid1 device (make a 50MB partition for this). This will result in a normal performance level of the raid5 volume.


Which kernel version seems to be stable in realation with XFS, LVM and
MD?

I am using the 1.0.2 with decent success. I have a occasional hang during mount on one box with a squid cache which havn't tracked down yet. No LVM or MD involved. I do have a box with a md raid5 which seems to do fine which is made of 3 40GB IDE disks.


Some 2.4.x kernels had problems in the past.

The releases based on the Red Hat kernels (the XFS 1.0 1.0.1 and 1.0.2) releases do well. They are well tested. The XFS 1.0.2 release is the latest and there is a contributed Red Hat errata kernel for 1.0.2 in the contrib directory of the ftp site. ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/


Cheers

--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.


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