xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: mount: Function not implemented?

To: "Steve Lord" <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: mount: Function not implemented?
From: "Anthony Biacco" <ABiacco@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:45:32 -0600
Cc: <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcRt/n5EZAUkFI9QSjeQ4flGpQRGBwAcYSkg
Thread-topic: mount: Function not implemented?
 

>Raw devices don't do any bigger I/O's, this is merely the unit of
allocation used by the filesystem, not the unit of 
>I/O to the disk drives. XFS will still allocate disk space in large
contiguous chunks.

They ALLOW bigger I/Os.
Raw devices aren't limited by the page size or the OS cache. That's the
whole purpose of the raw device. I could use them, but I don't want the
maintenance nightmare of 1 oracle DB file per device.

>Large block sizes I think helped Irix more than they would Linux.

Agreed.

*sigh* maybe I'll check out OCFS.

-Tony
------------------------------
Anthony J. Biacco
Systems/Network Administrator
Quris, Inc.
720-836-2015

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Lord [mailto:lord@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 8:09 PM
To: Anthony Biacco
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: mount: Function not implemented?

Anthony Biacco wrote:
> But it's a 64-bit system.
> How do people get oracle performing on enterprise class hardware, with

> linux, with such a low page size?
> Do you just have to say, the hell with it, and create a raw device?
> 

Raw devices don't do any bigger I/O's, this is merely the unit of
allocation used by the filesystem, not the unit of I/O to the disk
drives. XFS will still allocate disk space in large contiguous chunks.

Large block sizes I think helped Irix more than they would Linux.

Steve


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