Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:38:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (twinlark.arctic.org [207.7.145.18]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id j8DGcaiL005828 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:38:36 -0700 Received: (qmail 21533 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2005 16:35:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (127.0.0.1) by 127.0.0.1 with ESMTPS (AES256-SHA); 13 Sep 2005 16:35:57 -0000 Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 09:35:57 -0700 (PDT) From: dean gaudet To: Nicolas Kowalski cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: Speed up xfsdump ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4325BA69.4070709@sgi.com> <20050912174223.51325.qmail@web34104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20050913123852.Z4874818@boing.melbourne.sgi.com> <4326D34C.9010404@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 6133 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: dean-list-linux-xfs@arctic.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-xfs Content-Length: 573 Lines: 14 On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Nicolas Kowalski wrote: > PS: as an additional test, on the same array/server, I created an ext3 > filesystem, pushed the same files than for the XFS/xfsdump tests, > and ran a dump session: if the xfs filesystem was created "live" and had files added/deleted along the way it's likely to be more fragmented than a freshly created ext3 filesystem which had a bunch of files copied to it right after being created... one more test you might want to do is a fresh xfs fs which you populate the same way you populated the ext3 fs. -dean