[Top] [All Lists]

Re: observed significant performance improvement using "delaylog" in

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: observed significant performance improvement using "delaylog" in
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 04:56:26 -0500
In-reply-to: <i41q43$6td$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <201008121346.30760.eye.of.the.8eholder@xxxxxxxxx> <201008122105.35787@xxxxxx> <i41q43$6td$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6
Peter Niemayer put forth on 8/12/2010 4:46 PM:

> To me, as of today, XFS' big strength is performing good to
> excellent (while not always better than all other file-systems)
> in many use-cases - without worries about instability or immaturity.

+1  But don't forget the excellent tool set which I think is a little better
than those of the other filesystems.  XFS has the only functional/reliable
online defrag tool AFAIK.  The only 'missing' feature compared to the other
FSes is filesystem shrink ability, but for the majority of XFS users, I'm
guessing this isn't an issue as data sets are always growing.

Some benchmark results maybe worth a look:


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>