Re: streaming media and realtime subvolume

[Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>]

At 10:17 7-11-2002 -0500, George Georgalis wrote:

> I do have a few questions though. I'm not sure if blade's disks used
> xfs-1.0 or xfs-1.1; and xfs-1.2 seems eminent (I saw some xfs-1.2preX
> patches). Does the filesystem remain the same through these version
> changes or should I think about doing a mkfs.xfs each time I upgrade
> the the xfs version?

No, the filesystem will not change. Only the log format has changed over 
time And you would only notice that using a really old kernel and a unclean 
shutdown.

> I expect a single 7200rpm ide drive to be able to handle the stream.

reading from or writing to?

> I'm using raid for high availability; but uninterrupted streams is
> a must. What mount parameters can I use to assure uninterrupted io?

Is it a single file?

> Are there other adjustments I should be thinking of? I've seen a few
> mentions of the Linux xfs realtime subvolume but no doc, is it ready for
> production? From what I can tell, it's a non journeled contiguous data
> block. Maybe I should just use ext2 for the media files? Would that be

Read speed is about as fast on most filesystems, at least for a IDE disk.
That is, xfs, ext2/3 and reiserfs are almost as fast reading a single large 
file. XFS is good with large files in particular.

> higher performance? I'm not too worried about fsck, because in the case
> of corruption I can remake the filesystem (data partition) and renew the
> data from the node server.

If data corruption is not a issue and you do a lot of writing to the 
filesystem, it might* be faster to use a non journaling filesystem.

*Baring a number of caveats ofcourse. For most people this is negligble but 
not always so. It depends on too much factors.

Cheers
Seth
--
Seth
It might just be your lucky day, if you only knew.