Re: Default mount options (that suck less).

Justin Piszcz
2007-10-31T11:27:31Z

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, James Braid wrote:

> On 30 Oct 2007, at 00:45, Timothy Shimmin wrote:
>> It might be interesting if people let us know what non-default
>> mkfs and mount options that they are using for their various
>> configurations/classes.
>> Didn't Russell C. have some survey years ago - can't remember if
>> that was for h/ware or what now.
>
> We have a ~100TB filesystem that was made with the default mkfs.xfs options
> from memory. The only mount option we use is inode64.
>

Impressive, what architecture do you run? ia64 or x86_64? What
performance differences did you see?

Justin.