xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:58:19 -0600
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231427430.6569@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012221128440.5245@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101222175611.1c7d5190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D124B71.9030401@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20101223012655.2681c596@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012221928050.7452@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101223005630.GJ4907@dastard> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012230442150.7452@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231304130.12482@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20101223195544.53d45f0b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231427430.6569@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
Justin Piszcz put forth on 12/23/2010 1:29 PM:

> Using a partition shows a slight degredation in the re-write speed but
> an increase in performance for sequential output and input with the mode
> set to perform.  Looks like this is what I will be using as it is the
> fastest
> speeds overall except for the rewrite.

As Dave mentioned earlier, performance may degrade significantly over
time as the FS grows and ages, compared to running benchies against an
empty filesystem today, especially if your mkfs.xfs parms were off the
mark when creating.

-- 
Stan

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