Re: Why is xfs recommended?

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

 



On 11/12/2014 03:21 AM, Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
Just wondering about the usecases. In all my testing ext4 has been 
consistently faster for sustained and random read/writes on large files  (VM 
images).

Tested with/without external ssd journals and caches.
XFS scales well when there is lot of meta data and multi-threaded I/O involved [1].
Choosing a file system is mostly about running the  kind of workload you would expect your system to see, with your hardware configuration and your version of the OS.  If ext4 gives you better performance when used as back end for gluster with your settings and workload, there shouldn't be any reason why you cannot go with it.

[1] http://xfs.org/images/d/d1/Xfs-scalability-lca2012.pdf

nb. While you can use a external journal with xfs I found the support and 
tools for it too marginal to risk using. Unable to move, resize or remove the 
journal without manually editing the partition bytes, whereas ext4 has tune2fs 
for all of that. Plus builtin support for loading the journal via label or 
uuid.


thanks,



_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Development]     [Linux Filesytems Development]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux