A quick question for anyone who knows: Is 4kstacks still a problem for the xfs
in kernel 2.6.11? If not, then at what kernel release did it stop being a
RHEL 4 has 2.6.9, and none of its patches obviously refer to xfs, so it's
probably the stock 2.6.9 xfs code.
Robin Humble wrote on Wednesday 30 March 2005 22:13:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:23:56PM -0800, David Kewley wrote:
> >As you may know, RHEL comes without xfs enabled in the kernel. My
> >understanding is that RH chose this path because a) they have in-house
> >expertise in ext3 but not for xfs, and b) they believe that xfs doesn't
> > offer any advantages to their customers that ext3 cannot provide.
> a) fair enough
> b) I think RedHat are wrong
I wonder what they'd say to raw performance numbers. Maybe something like
"Those differences don't matter in real life." or "Sequential I/O isn't
representative of real use." :) Whatever the case, the more of their
customers make the case to them for supporting xfs, and the more that provide
good hard reasons why, the more likely they are to consider investing in
in-house xfs expertise.
Thanks very much for your experience reports & patches. That's very helpful
to me. I took a gander at your website, and it sounds like we're in similar
situations. I'm a sysadmin for a computational geophysics beowulf. The
fileserver I'm asking about is a 9.6TB raw (24x400) 3-ware 9500 based box. :)