ext3 efficiency, larger vs smaller file system, lots of inodes...

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

 



(... to Nabble Ext3:Users - reposted by me after I joined the ext3-users mailing list - sorry for the dup...)

A bit of a rambling subject there but I am trying to figure out if it is more efficient at runtime to have few very large file systems (8 TB) vs a larger number of smaller file systems.  The file systems will hold many small files.

My preference is to have a larger number of smaller file systems for faster recovery and less impact if a problem does occur, but I was wondering if anybody had information from a runtime performance perspective  - is there a difference between few large and many small file systems ?  Is memory consumption higher for the inode tables if there are more small ones vs one really large one ?

Also, does anybody have a reasonable formula for calculating memory requirements of a given file system ?

Thanks.
Joe

_______________________________________________
Ext3-users mailing list
Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users

[Index of Archives]         [Linux RAID]     [Kernel Development]     [Red Hat Install]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Postgresql]     [Fedora]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux