On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:01:10PM -0800, Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
> I'm testing xfs for use in storing 100 million+ small files
> (roughly 4 to 10KB each) and some directories will contain
> tens of thousands of files. There will be a lot of random
> reading, and also some random writing, and very little
> deletion.
.....
> a) Should I just go with the 512 byte blocksize or is that going to be
> bad for some performance reason? Going to 1024 is no problem,
> but I'd prefer not to waste 20% of the partition capacity by using 4096.
I'd suggest wasting 20% of disk space and staying with 4k block size.
> b) Are there any other mkfs.xfs paramters that I should play with.
Large directory block size (-n size=XXX), esp. if you are putting
thousands of files per directory....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
|