xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LBA to File?

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: LBA to File?
From: Charles Shannon Hendrix <shannon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 20:19:45 -0500
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303070745230.16532-100000@stout.americas.sgi.com>
Mail-followup-to: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303071150220.30312-100000@kenzo.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303070745230.16532-100000@stout.americas.sgi.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 07:55:32AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:

> I think it's important to remember that XFS has been in use for -many-
> years on irix, on everything from personal desktops to huge servers
> with filesystems on the order of tens of terabytes.   While I'm
> sure that usage patterns will affect the life of any device, I don't think
> that this has been a problem in general.

I think this is mostly a matter of IDE disks often not being very
high quality.

So far, I've not had SCSI disks which died show a particular excessive
defect pattern in places like the superblock, swap spaces, and other
high-use areas.  Of course, I usually don't look.

I _have_ seen it on IDE.

> (And, I can think of other disk usages patterns which could result in
> disproportional use of one area of a disk - /var/log partitions, for 
> example).

I would imagine that programs which access raw partitions would have usage
patterns which would hit certain areas very hard in comparison to others.


-- 
UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza____________________s h a n n o n@wido !SPAM maker.com


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