Re: Default mount options (that suck less).

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

James Braid wrote:
> On 30 Oct 2007, at 00:45, Timothy Shimmin wrote:
>> It might be interesting if people let us know what non-default
>> mkfs and mount options that they are using for their various
>> configurations/classes.
>> Didn't Russell C. have some survey years ago - can't remember if
>> that was for h/ware or what now.
> 
> We have a ~100TB filesystem that was made with the default mkfs.xfs  
> options from memory. The only mount option we use is inode64.

Hm, which has been another pet peeve of mine; shouldn't inode64 flag the
SB when the first >32bit inode is created?  It always bothered me that
inode64 was a mount option which appears to be something you could turn
back off, even though there may be >32bit inodes on disk already.

-Eric