| To: | Niv Sardi <xaiki@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less). |
| From: | David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:55:02 +1100 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20071029075657.GA84369978@melbourne.sgi.com> |
| References: | <20071029075657.GA84369978@melbourne.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.1i |
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:56:57PM +1100, Niv Sardi wrote: > Hello, > > XFS's default mount options are in most cases sub-optimal, we should try Mkfs options ;) > to have more sensible defaults, so far I'm following some quick dave-powered > recomendations: > > - version 2 logs > - attr2 > - lazy superblock counters > - less allocation groups for single disk configs > > - imaxpct default can be reduced > > it is currently 25, what would be reasonable ? Given that 25% on a 4GB filesystem will allow about 5million inodes, I think it's probably reasonable to bring it down to 5% by the time we pass 1TB and 1% by 50TB..... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Default mount options (that suck less)., Niv Sardi |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Crash with XFS on top of DRBD (DRBD 8.0.6 svn / Kernel 2.6.22), Laurent Caron |
| Previous by Thread: | Default mount options (that suck less)., Niv Sardi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Default mount options (that suck less)., nscott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |