XFS status update for August 2010

[Michael Monnerie]

On Montag, 6. September 2010 Eric Sandeen wrote:
> People need to read up a little and know what they're tuning;
> repeating this kind of suggestion leads to cargo-cultism for
> performance "tuning"
> 
> IOW don't turn knobs just because they are there ... :)

Other than most who write here I'm not a developer, but a sysadmin, 
responsible for servers of all kind of ages, with XFS usage back to the 
early 2.6 series. Default mount options use to change sometimes, and I 
can't always check that after a system/kernel upgrade the default 
options are satisfied or not. So specifying everything is safe, and 
doesn't do any harm - right?
And as it was Sunday morning, I wanted to help out Willy quickly, 
without looking specifically which options he would need. I was sure 
some of you who know it would guide him later, but maybe only on Monday, 
so I took that quick path to find a solution.

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/attachments/20100906/ee9de2f6/attachment.sig>