From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F577F51 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2015 18:56:12 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12F768F8033 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2015 16:56:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qa0-f45.google.com (mail-qa0-f45.google.com [209.85.216.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id gGzvBLmxLUHxuZAv (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 04 Jan 2015 16:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id f12so13045622qad.18 for ; Sun, 04 Jan 2015 16:56:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from shtub-cm.localnet (ool-182d7911.dyn.optonline.net. [24.45.121.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g20sm33409515qar.17.2015.01.04.16.56.02 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 04 Jan 2015 16:56:03 -0800 (PST) From: Hillel Lubman Subject: What is a recommended XFS sector size for hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives? Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2015 19:56:01 -0500 Message-ID: <1806495.BCZcrVVEOf@shtub-cm> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1301980108027816736==" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1301980108027816736== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="nextPart1440770.HVOdQ0Q7sz" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --nextPart1440770.HVOdQ0Q7sz Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi. Looking around I saw some references that it's preferable to use sector size (sectsz) of 4 KB when creating XFS partitions on hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives and also some mentions of making that a default in mkfs.xfs. However I noticed that my current mkfs.xfs (3.2.1) used with current Debian testing (Linux 3.16.0) still uses 512 B sectors by default. Can you please clarify what after all is the recommended sector size for such drives and why isn't it a default in mkfs.xfs (since supposedly defaults are generally recommended optimal settings unless you have some special use case). Can you please also add this topic to the XFS FAQ (http://www.xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ[1]), since I couldn't find any information about it there. Thanks! Hillel Lubman. -------- [1] http://www.xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ --nextPart1440770.HVOdQ0Q7sz Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

Hi.

 

Looking around I saw some references that it's preferable to use sector size (sectsz) of 4 KB when creating XFS partitions on hybrid (512e) advanced format hard drives and also some mentions of making that a default in mkfs.xfs. However I noticed that my current mkfs.xfs (3.2.1) used with current Debian testing (Linux 3.16.0) still uses 512 B sectors by default.

 

Can you please clarify what after all is the recommended sector size for such drives and why isn't it a default in mkfs.xfs (since supposedly defaults are generally recommended optimal settings unless you have some special use case).

 

Can you please also add this topic to the XFS FAQ (http://www.xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ), since I couldn't find any information about it there.

 

Thanks!

 

Hillel Lubman.

--nextPart1440770.HVOdQ0Q7sz-- --===============1301980108027816736== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs --===============1301980108027816736==--