From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id l6JDEObm022896 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:14:27 -0700 Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:14:01 +1000 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: tuning XFS for tiny files Message-ID: <20070719131401.GW31489@sgi.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Andi Kleen Cc: timotheus , linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 03:38:43PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > timotheus writes: > > > Hi. Is there a way to tune XFS filesystem parameters to better address > > the usage pattern of 10000s of tiny files in directories such as: > > maildir directory > > mh mail directory > > ccache directory > > > > My understanding is that XFS will always be much slower than reiserfs > > with respect to deleting 10000s files; but that XFS might be possible to > > tune toward more rapid read access of 10000s of tiny files. > > -d agcount=1 at mkfs time might help (unless you have a lot of CPUs) Yeah, might help, but it's not good for being able to repair the filesystem - repair will be unable to find a secondary superblock to compare the primary against and abort..... -d agcount is only good for science experiments, not production systems ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group