Yea larger - sorry larger I meant <snip> Yes, it is definitely possible that using a bigger resource group may help with performance. Since this is not yet in production, I would urge you to do some testing now while you can and compare results from the default size of 256 versus a setting of around 2048. </snip> On 10/27/07 2:21 PM, "Jos Vos" <jos@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 02:15:33PM -0400, Josh Gray wrote: > >> Support said i would probably expect significant improvement with >> more RG's but we went with the other file format before we tried that. > > You mean *less* (and larger) RGs I presume? -- Josh Gray Systems Administrator NIC Inc Email: jgray@xxxxxxxxxx Desk/Mobile: 913-221-1520 "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." - Sir Edmund Hillary -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
