xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2 questions

To: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2 questions
From: Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:04:49 +0200
>received: from mobile.sauter-bc.com (unknown [10.1.6.21]) by basel1.sauter-bc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1D657306; Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:04:51 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: Libor Vanìk <libor@xxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: Sauter AG, Basel
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020412155435.038711c8@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Seth Mos schrieb:
> 
> At 14:25 12-4-2002 +0200, =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Libor_Van=ECk?= wrote:
> >Hi,
> >I'd like to ask 2 small yes/no questions about XFS:
> >- does XFS support fs resising?
> 
> Only larger, shrinking is not supported.
> 
> >- is there any way how to have physicaly more (Linux) machines which would
> >act like one big XFS (probably all driven by one "master" machine which
> >would handle I/O requests)?
> 
> There are some other filesystem block layers that can do this but I don't
> know if any of them actually work with XFS. I see some trivial test reports
> but I can't remember if any of them was succesful or not.

You could use network block devices on several physikal machines and
build one big RAID0/1/5 volume with it on the master server. Then put
XFS or LVM/XFS on top of it. I tried this once and it worked quite well
and fast. If been told you can get better performance than with NFS.

-Simon

> 
> >(I think it's clear what I would like to do ;-))
> 
> Yup
> 
> 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>