On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:10:30 +0100 sophana <sophana@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This is just an idea... not very sure if this is your problem. gfs volume is on a disk array, write cache and all that ... should not decrease performance *that* much. -- Jure Pe?ar http://jure.pecar.org/
gfs performance
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: gfs performance
- From: pegasus at nerv.eu.org (Jure Pečar)
- Date: Fri Jan 27 23:36:50 2006
- In-reply-to: <43DA9A56.9080502@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- References: <20060127224908.413fcf25.pegasus@xxxxxxxxxxx> <43DA9A56.9080502@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Follow-Ups:
- gfs performance
- From: sophana
- gfs performance
- References:
- gfs performance
- From: Jure Pečar
- gfs performance
- From: sophana
- gfs performance
- Prev by Date: HP storageworks DAT72 USB external tape drive and centos 4.2
- Next by Date: sata_nv, CentOS 4 update 2 and hang during post-install
- Previous by thread: gfs performance
- Next by thread: gfs performance
- Index(es):
 |