| To: | Linux fs XFS <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Optimal XFS formatting options? |
| From: | Linda Walsh <xfs@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:03:40 -0800 |
| In-reply-to: | <20242.10382.19330.275280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <33140169.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20242.10382.19330.275280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.24 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 |
Peter Grandi wrote:
----
I was unaware that the block size was larger on 64b kernels.
Is that what you are referring to ?
(would be nice)...
One thing I have a Q on -- you (OP), said this was an 'iscsi' box?
That means hookup over an network, right?
You are planning on using a 10Gbit or faster network fabric, right?
a 1Gb ethernet will only get you 125MB/s max... doesn't take much
tuning to hit that speed.
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: concurrent direct IO write in xfs, Linda Walsh |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | NotificaciÃn webmaster!!â , Webmaster ActualizaciÃn Departamento |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Optimal XFS formatting options?, Michael Monnerie |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Optimal XFS formatting options?, Peter Grandi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |