On 8/29/2013 1:09 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > Is it expected when formatting, using defaults, that a thinp volume compared to either a conventional LV or partition of the same size, should have a higher agcount? > > > HDD, GPT partitioned, 100GB partition size: > > [root@f19s ~]# mkfs.xfs /dev/sda7 > meta-data=/dev/sda7 isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=6553600 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=0 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=26214400, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 > log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=12800, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > > > A 400GB partition, made into PV, PV added to VG, and all extents put into a thinpool volume, a 100GB virtual sized LV: > > [root@f19s ~]# mkfs.xfs /dev/mapper/vg1-data > meta-data=/dev/mapper/vg1-data isize=256 agcount=16, agsize=1638400 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=0 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=26214400, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 > log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=12800, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > > > > I get agcount=4 on a conventional LV as well. Why agcount=16 on thinp? More information would be helpful, specifically WRT the device stack underlying mkfs.xfs. I.e. we need to know more about the LVM configuration. See: http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_What_information_should_I_include_when_reporting_a_problem.3F -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
