From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wido den Hollander Subject: Re: Fs to use? Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 10:26:18 +0100 Message-ID: <5098D7BA.3080900@widodh.nl> References: <44586A02-C7FB-423A-9CF4-5470FE417581@profihost.ag> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp02.mail.pcextreme.nl ([109.72.87.138]:40775 "EHLO smtp02.mail.pcextreme.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750706Ab2KFJ0U (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2012 04:26:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <44586A02-C7FB-423A-9CF4-5470FE417581@profihost.ag> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG Cc: ceph-devel On 06-11-12 07:54, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Hello list, > > is there any recommendation regarding fs? I mean btrfs is still experimental would you still use it with ceph in production? Do I need big metadata with btrfs? (seems to make btrfs slow) > XFS seems to be the recommendation right now. Although in the long term goal you want btrfs due to the checksumming you might be best off with XFS at the moment. Wido > Greets > Stefan-- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >