xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: external log vs internal log and mkfs.xfs options

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: external log vs internal log and mkfs.xfs options
From: Matt Stegman <matts@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:40:57 -0600 (CST)
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.44L.0502081535530.6839-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Oops.  Ignore my last message, it was sent by mistake.  Unfortunately
Ctrl+X for "send message" is right next to Ctrl+C for "cancel message."

-- 
Matt Stegman


On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Matt Stegman wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, David Sparks wrote:
> >
> > Nobody commented on this question though, I'll put it up again.  Most of
> > the information I've gathered on external logs dates back to the IRIX
> > days -- I hope there isn't anything out of date there.
> >
> >  > Regarding external logs, I've never formatted a XFS with an external
> >  > log.  From what I can gather (google, man pages), doing so is supposed
> >  > to reduce disk head seeking hence performance is improved.  Is anyone
> >  > aware of any benchmarks that explore internal/external logs and sizes?
> >  > My preference is for an internal log as that just simplifies things.
> >
> > Is there any advantage to an external log on a separate partition on the
> > same device, as opposed to an external log on a separate device?
> > Basically is an external log only for performance benefits or are there
> > robustness benefits also?


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