| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less). |
| From: | Hannes Dorbath <light@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:05:36 +0100 |
| Cc: | Niv Sardi <xaiki@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <4725E84D.3030609@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20071029075657.GA84369978@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4725E84D.3030609@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070728 Thunderbird/2.0.0.6 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 |
On 29.10.2007 15:03, Eric Sandeen wrote: Niv Sardi wrote:XFS's default mount options are in most cases sub-optimal, we should try to have more sensible defaults, so far I'm following some quick dave-powered recomendations: Is there any reason to not set the default inode size to 512 bytes? ..as suggested in: http://www.suse.de/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/ -- Regards, Hannes Dorbath |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less)., Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less)., Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less)., Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less)., Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |