On 7/25/2013 7:36 PM, Roberto Spadim wrote: > ok =] in other words no problem about performace loss, just use one > xfs per disk, right? > the second doubt... i was thinking about /boot /home and /, in the > same partition, should i consider other design? a /boot with ext2 or > ext3 and a / with xfs? What I would do: swap 1GB partition on each disk md RAID1 /boot ext2 100MB rootfs XFS remainder of disk home ... > i'm considering only one partition with swap and one partition with > raid1+xfs, what you think? I wouldn't do it. See above. > in a crash (power failure) i will have better rescure with only one > partition? or many partitions? Having a separate /boot is always a good idea. And truthfully, for a system of this caliber, you don't really gain anything by using XFS, certainly not from a performance standpoint. If you were already an XFS user on large systems and it was simply your "go to" filesystem, then using it on this system may make sense. And if you don't have a working UPS, you should definitely stay away from XFS. Power failure shouldn't cause filesystem corruption, but it may well corrupt or zero out files that are open for write but not written. XFS journals metadata, not data. -- Stan -- 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
