Hello,
I intend to set up a XFS filesystem on a RAID0 (Linux md) with 512k
Chunk Size. Since I cannot align the log section sunit to 512k, and
since the filesystem will have not much write activity anyways (in fact,
it'll be mounted read-only most of the time), I tried not to align the
log section sunit at all via -l sunit=0, but this does not appear to
work:
# truncate -s 1G /tmp/foo{0,1}
# losetup /dev/loop0 /tmp/foo0; losetup /dev/loop1 /tmp/foo1
# mdadm -C -l raid0 -n 2 /dev/md9 /dev/loop[01]
# mkfs.xfs -l sunit=0 /dev/md9
log stripe unit (524288 bytes) is too large (maximum is 256KiB)
log stripe unit adjusted to 32KiB
meta-data=/dev/md9 isize=256 agcount=8, agsize=65408 blks
= sectsz=512 attr=2
data = bsize=4096 blocks=523264, imaxpct=25
= sunit=128 swidth=256 blks
naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0
log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=2560, version=2
= sectsz=512 sunit=8 blks, lazy-count=1
realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0
Is this a bug or a feature?
The minimum I was able to limit the log sunit to was -l sunit=8, i.e. 1
block. Is there a difference between sunit=0 and sunit=1 in practice or
are single log entries aligned to blocks anyways?
Btw...
Since the filesystem is mostly read-only, I was also thinking about
reducing the size of the log section. The planned filesystem will be
5.5T or bigger, which results in 2G log section per default. I thought
about limiting it to 128M or 64M. There will be no concurrent write
activity on the fs. Together with the zero-alignment, what do you think
about that?
PS: I'm not on this list, please CC: me in replies. My Mail-Followup-To:
header should take care of that.
Thanks for your help & regards
Mario
--
File names are infinite in length where infinity is set to 255 characters.
-- Peter Collinson, "The Unix File System"
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
