Mark A Basil <mbasil@alabanza.com> wrote: > > Andrew, > > Actually no I havn't had much experience with larger journals. I've basically > only been testing for the past few days, and hadn't gotten that far yet. > > Would you say that for this type of application a journal size of about 200MB > would be appropriate for partitions that are heavily written to? Would this > need to be greater than 200 in any case? Currently we're only using dual > 18GB SCSI drives in most machines. mke2fs and tune2fs will support up to 102,400 blocks (400M normally). Try it. Probably 400M will be best.. > One of my other main concerns is quotas. I hear ext3+quota = deadlocks in > alot of cases. Luckily I havn't seen any as of yet. I'm hoping that I don't > see any at all. I'm assuming that using the data=journal mode is beneficial > to quotas on a server as well. Yes, quota is still deadlocky apparently. I thought it was OK actually. Maybe it got broken some time in the past 18 months :( Stephen is working on it. I assume the deadlocks are pretty obscure. _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
