On Thu, 2002-03-07 at 07:37, Knut J Bjuland wrote: > Are Redhat going to include XFS in a rawhide kernel or in Redhat 8.X when it is ready? I'm waiting for that since a loooong time. In my tests, XFS performed better (in terms of stability AND performance under heavy load) than ReiserFS and Ext3 for workloads like: databases (MySQL), Samba and NFS fileservers (and also including here webservers, 'cause they are fileservers after all, aren't they?) and access to large files. ReiserFS outperformed it (and everyone else) for proxy servers (Squid). Ext3 outperformed it for mail relays (strange, isn't?). For general usage (regular workstations), there are no notable differences between filesystems. As a matter of fact, i'm using the XFS version of Red Hat 7.2 everywhere, except laptops and the workloads mentioned above (proxies, mail relays). I've seen a case when, by simply changing the kernel from the regular one to the XFS-enabled one, the system load decreased noticeably, and the I/O activity became more relaxed (a very busy webserver). Databases too, perform usually better on XFS than on other filesystems (only tried MySQL). Here are the URLs to the webpage of the modified distribution and to the installer ISO image. Using that ISO, you can install a Red Hat 7.2 system that's exactly like the original, except for the fact that it can use XFS filesystems. http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/ ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/Release-1.0.2/installer/i386/ It's indeed strange that Red Hat, given its commitment to enterprise-class applications and servers, chose to ignore XFS. -- Florin Andrei The ability to remember useless stuff is inversely related to the useful knowledge in one's head.
