From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:41:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org (pentafluge.infradead.org [213.146.154.40]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l7UDfn4p025257 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:41:51 -0700 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:20:02 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: ZFS, XFS, and EXT4 compared Message-ID: <20070830132002.GA4086@infradead.org> References: <1188454611.23311.13.camel@toonses.gghcwest.com> <1188457666.24970.94.camel@edge.yarra.acx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1188457666.24970.94.camel@edge.yarra.acx> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Nathan Scott Cc: "Jeffrey W. Baker" , zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 05:07:46PM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote: > To improve metadata performance, you have many options with XFS (which > ones are useful depends on the type of metadata workload) - you can try > a v2 format log, and mount with "-o logbsize=256k", try increasing the > directory block size (e.g. mkfs.xfs -nsize=16k, etc), and also the log > size (mkfs.xfs -lsize=XXXXXXb). Okay, these suggestions are one too often now. v2 log and large logs/log buffers are the almost universal suggestions, and we really need to make these defaults. XFS is already the laughing stock of the Linux community due to it's absurdely bad default settings.