| To: | Ralf Gross <Ralf-Lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: reasonable xfs fs size for 30-100 TB? |
| From: | James Braid <jamesb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 27 Jun 2007 10:57:20 +0100 |
| Cc: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20070626171719.GD32546@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20070626171719.GD32546@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) |
Ralf Gross wrote: My main concern is the amount of RAM I need for a fsck of the xfs fs. Last time I search for the xfs requirements, I found the rule of thumb: 2 GB RAM for 1 TB of disk storage + some RAM per x inodes. A real world example: we have a ~70TB filesystem, with ~70M inodes and xfs_repair uses about 13-15GB of memory IIRC (haven't run a repair in a while) using a recentish 2.8.x version. Hope that helps. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH] Implement ioctl to mark AGs as "don't use/use", Ruben Porras |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 4/7][TAKE5] support new modes in fallocate, David Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | reasonable xfs fs size for 30-100 TB?, Ralf Gross |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] Implement ioctl to mark AGs as "don't use/use", Ruben Porras |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |