On 10/1/12 9:28 AM, Richard Ems wrote: > On 02/24/2012 04:17 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> *MKFS* >>>> We also heavily use ACLs for almost all of our files. Christoph Hellwig >>>> suggested in a previous mail to use "-i size=512" on XFS creation, so my >>>> mkfs.xfs would look something like: >>>> >>>> mkfs.xfs -i size=512 -d su=stripe_size,sw=28 -L Backup_2 /dev/sdX1 >> Be sure the stripe geometry matches the way the raid controller is >> set up. >> >> You know the size of your acls, so you can probably do some testing >> to find out how well 512-byte inodes keep ACLs in-line. > > > Hi Eric, > > This is a reply to an email from you sent 7 months ago ... > > How could I do the testing you were proposing? How can I find out if my > 512-byte inodes keep our ACLs in-line? > > I am going to create a similar new RAID set, and wanted to check this > before on the one already in production. you can use the xfs_bmap tool to map the attribute fork by using the "-a" option. If it lists any block numbers, then it's outside the inode. If you have varying sizes of acls, you'd just iterate over the fs to see what you've got. -Eric > Thanks, > Richard > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
