Hi Jeffrey, On 02/14/2012 07:01 PM, Jeffrey Hundstad wrote: > Richard, > > Someone asked if you used inode64. I didn't see a response that you > did. Inode64 is a mount option. I bet this will help with your > problem. It appears that all the inodes will be (by default, without > the inode64 option) in the first 1TB of disk. This could cause a LOT of > seeks. BTW: the option by itself will not help. You'll need to > save/restore to have this help. However, I suspect over time it will > help if files old files are replaced by new ones. > > For example: > mount -o inode64 /dev/sda1 /home/ > > Here's some documentation: > > mount(8): inode64 > Indicates that XFS is allowed to create inodes at any location in the > filesystem, including those which will result in inode numbers occupying > more than 32 bits of significance. This is provided for backwards > compatibility, but causes problems for backup applications that cannot > handle large inode numbers. > > http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_What_is_the_inode64_mount_option_for.3F > Q: What is the inode64 mount option for? > > By default, with 32bit inodes, XFS places inodes only in the first 1TB > of a disk. If you have a disk with 100TB, all inodes will be stuck in > the first TB. This can lead to strange things like "disk full" when you > still have plenty space free, but there's no more place in the first TB > to create a new inode. Also, performance sucks. > > To come around this, use the inode64 mount options for filesystems >1TB. > Inodes will then be placed in the location where their data is, > minimizing disk seeks. What about that programs using only 32-bit stat() ? > > Beware that some old programs might have problems reading 64bit inodes, > especially over NFS. Your editor used inode64 for over a year with > recent (openSUSE 11.1 and higher) distributions using NFS and Samba > without any corruptions, so that might be a recent enough distro. > yes, I replied to Christoph's question stating that I am not using inode64. My reply was: " No, I did not use it, but I was thinking about and ran the script from http://sandeen.net/misc/summarise_stat.pl and got as an example on /bin: # /net/c3m/usr/local/software/XFS/summarise_stat.pl /bin/ 9 6.2% are scripts (shell, perl, whatever) 65 44.8% don't use any stat() family calls at all 61 42.1% use 32-bit stat() family interfaces only 9 6.2% use 64-bit stat64() family interfaces only 1 0.7% use both 32-bit and 64-bit stat() family interfaces So I was not sure if I should use inode64 or not. " Thanks, Richard -- Richard Ems mail: Richard.Ems@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cape Horn Engineering S.L. C/ Dr. J.J. Dómine 1, 5º piso 46011 Valencia Tel : +34 96 3242923 / Fax 924 http://www.cape-horn-eng.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
