| To: | Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes? |
| From: | Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 23 Dec 2010 22:50:36 +0100 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012231403440.5924@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | Intellique |
| 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.2.00.1012231403440.5924@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Le Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:07:13 -0500 (EST) vous écriviez:
> Main wonder I have is why when the partition is aligned to 1MiB,
> which is the default in parted 2.2+ I believe, is it slower than with
> no partitions?
1MiB possibly can't round well on the stripe boundaries. I suppose you
could get better results with 64KB or 16KB stripes. Did you try with an
LVM in between?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Florac | Direction technique
| Intellique
| <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| +33 1 78 94 84 02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?, Emmanuel Florac |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?, Justin Piszcz |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?, Stan Hoeppner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Anyone using XFS in production on > 20TiB volumes?, Justin Piszcz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |