|To:||Peter Grandi <pg_xf2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Subject:||Best filesystems ?|
|From:||Andrew Daviel <advax@xxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:06:36 -0700 (PDT)|
|Cc:||Linux XFS <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>|
|References:||<4CBE2403.8070108@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101019234217.GD12506@dastard> <19646.55189.843933.481529@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101021020009.GG12506@dastard> <19648.27859.799400.168394@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>|
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010, Peter Grandi wrote:
But the ig deal here is that's not something that a filesystem targeted at high bandwidth multistreaming loads should be optimized for, at least by default.
Has someone documented (recently, and correctly) what filesystems (XFS, ext3, ext4, reiser, JFS, VFAT etc.) are best for what tasks (mailboxes, database, general computing, video streaming etc.) ?
I messed around with Bonnie etc. a couple of years ago, deciding that XFS was better than ext3 for 4Mb mailbox fragments. Later I was quite impressed by an early ext4 on FC9, until it bombed. But I don't really have the skills to assess properly.
-- Andrew Daviel, TRIUMF, Canada
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||xfstests: use a common _filter_scratch function, Alex Elder|
|Next by Date:||[PATCH] xfstests: remove dead code in test 062, Christoph Hellwig|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: avoid mbox file fragmentation, Peter Grandi|
|Next by Thread:||Re: Best filesystems ?, Stan Hoeppner|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|