On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Richard Scobie <richard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Bill Davidsen wrote: > > >> That's certainly a valid point, if you are stuck using xfs by preference >> or requirement. I have seen claims that 2.6.32 will be better, but I have no >> intention of testing it, having parted company with xfs a while ago. > > The OP of the thread metioned, was able to duplicate the slowdown using > ext3, so it probably has nothing to do with XFS. It probably has to do with the added writes...if they can try it with ext2 (yeah, yeah, yuck) they might see something. Especially if this is raid 5 or 6. cc -- Chris Chen <muffaleta@xxxxxxxxx> "The fact that yours is better than anyone else's is not a guarantee that it's any good." -- Seen on a wall -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
