| To: | pg_xf2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Peter Grandi) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Best filesystems ? |
| From: | Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 23 Oct 2010 22:16:39 +0200 |
| Cc: | Linux XFS <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <19651.9652.631329.903552@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | Intellique |
| References: | <4CBE2403.8070108@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101019234217.GD12506@dastard> <19646.55189.843933.481529@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101021020009.GG12506@dastard> <19648.27859.799400.168394@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1010211258070.24449@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <19651.9652.631329.903552@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Le Sat, 23 Oct 2010 19:13:08 +0100 vous écriviez:
> Its major limitation are internal complexity and should
> only be used on 64b systems. It can support single filesystems
> larger than 10-15TB, but that's stretching things.
I currently take care of 100 servers with 20 to 80 TB XFS filesystems.
Most are under heavy use, 95% filled for more than 3 years in a row,
etc. I can safely affirm that XFS is definitely safe for anything up to
80 TB.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Florac | Direction technique
| Intellique
| <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| +33 1 78 94 84 02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS use within multi-threaded apps, Peter Grandi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS use within multi-threaded apps, Angelo McComis |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Best filesystems ?, Peter Grandi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Best filesystems ?, hank peng |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |