| To: | Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] default to inode64 on 64-bit systems |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:06:08 -0500 |
| Cc: | xfs mailing list <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20090707093802.GA32125@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4A52419E.5020301@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20090707093802.GA32125@xxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) |
Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > On 06.07.2009 13:25, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> I'm tiring of telling people to use the inode64 mount option >> when they are experiencing bad performance on large xfs >> filesystems... >> >> 32-bit userspace is still largely broken when it comes to still >> using 32-bit stat calls, but on 64-bit systems this should be >> safe. >> >> The only problem here is moving the disk onto a 32-bit system, or using >> 32-bit apps. But I think it's a small risk. >> >> What do we think about the following? > > What is with people running 64bit kernel but 32bit Userspace? > Good point. I wonder how many do that... hrm. -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: small common.config cleanup, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] bump up nr_to_write in xfs_vm_writepage, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] default to inode64 on 64-bit systems, Matthias Schniedermeyer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, RFC] default to inode64 on 64-bit systems, Matthias Schniedermeyer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |