Re: [CentOS] Calling All FS Fanatics

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]





Steve Bergman wrote:
I would be interested to see your results if you care to try ext2.  The
kernel guys are pretty well committed to supporting it long term. They
are absolutely *anal* about making changes which could destabilize it in
any way.

I finally figured out my slowdown problem: I had somehow turned off write-caching on the 3Ware controller. Hoo-Boy! Does that kill throughput! What the heck is that option for anyway?

Here are a handful of bonnie++ benchmarks, I decided to just quote the block write and block read numbers:

        MB/Sec
        Write   Read
XFS:    231     202
ext2, dir_index:
        221     205
ext3, dir_index, data=ordered:
        80      196
ext3, dir_index, data=writeback:
        95      199
ext3, data=writeback:
        95      201

As you hinted, ext2 has almost the same performance as XFS. Data=writeback on ext3 helps some but not a whole lot. Dir_index doesn't seem to do a thing.

I'm really torn here. I can make use of the extra write speeds of ext2 or XFS. But is XFS stable and supported enough for 'production' use? Will I regret a forced fsck on a 1TB ext2 volume?

Steve, you say you've been happy with XFS for a few years. Have you been using it under any kind of load?

Kirk Bocek

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux