| To: | Milind Dumbare <milind@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: EXT vs XFS at 80% filled filesystem |
| From: | Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:34:50 -0400 |
| Cc: | linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <49F9565E.40804@xxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <49F9565E.40804@xxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 01:12:22PM +0530, Milind Dumbare wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have heard of XFS's performance is not good as compared to EXT3 when
> the filesystem(disk) is 80% filled with data. Is it true? I have went
> through lots of performance documents of both XFS and EXT3 but could not
> find such performance benchmarking (for 80% full filesystems).
I've not heard of any such performance metrics, and I suspect it would
very much depend on how the filesystem was "aged". A filesystem that
has been in use for a few years and is at 80% capacity will behave
very different from a brand-new filesystem which was freshly formatted
and then filled with a few large files until said filesystem was 80%
full.
- Ted
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: EXT vs XFS at 80% filled filesystem, Michael Monnerie |
|---|---|
| Previous by Thread: | Re: EXT vs XFS at 80% filled filesystem, Michael Monnerie |
| Next by Thread: | Sometimes df is not updated after remove within xfs via nfs., hgichon |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |