xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LWN.net article: creating 1 billion files -> XFS looses

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: LWN.net article: creating 1 billion files -> XFS looses
From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 00:58:40 +0200
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20100906220410.GD7362@dastard>
Organization: it-management http://it-management.at
References: <201008191312.49346@xxxxxx> <20100906154254.5542426c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100906220410.GD7362@dastard>
User-agent: KMail/1.12.4 (Linux/2.6.35.4-zmi; KDE/4.3.5; x86_64; ; )
On Dienstag, 7. September 2010 Dave Chinner wrote:
> # mkfs.xfs -d size=64k
> 
> Will speed up large directory operations by at least an order of
> magnitude.
 
I've read the man page for mkfs.xfs, but I couldn't find out if using 
mkfs -d su=64k,sw=2
would be a redundant (and superior) option for that? I'd guess so, 
reading the description of sunit:

sunit=value
This  is  used  to specify the stripe unit for a RAID device or a 
logical volume. The value has to be specified in 512-byte block units. 
Use the su suboption to specify the stripe unit size in bytes. This
suboption ensures that data allocations will be stripe unit aligned when 
the current end of file is being extended and the file size is larger 
than 512KiB. Also inode allocations and the internal log will
be stripe unit aligned.

Or would I still need to use size=64k?

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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