From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n5H13giB188403 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:03:43 -0500 Received: from mailsrv1.zmi.at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D8FB22FF908 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailsrv1.zmi.at (mailsrv1.zmi.at [212.69.162.198]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id cwddMguzy7SwqkKP for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailsrv2.i.zmi.at (h081217106033.dyn.cm.kabsi.at [81.217.106.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mailsrv2.i.zmi.at", Issuer "power4u.zmi.at" (not verified)) by mailsrv1.zmi.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id F092F4EED for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:04:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from saturn.localnet (saturn.i.zmi.at [10.0.0.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mailsrv2.i.zmi.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69679400154 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:04:03 +0200 (CEST) From: Michael Monnerie Subject: Re: XFS Preallocate using ALLOCSP Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:04:02 +0200 References: <24042506.post@talk.nabble.com> <4A37D737.70004@sandeen.net> <8770d98c0906161438u339440cdm783340485a3db898@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8770d98c0906161438u339440cdm783340485a3db898@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200906170304.02775@zmi.at> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Dienstag 16 Juni 2009 Smit Shah wrote: > In the vmware sparse disk Ah, virtualization again. Yes, that's no good for performance ;-) There's a "defragment disk" button in VMware which simply copies the flat file on the filesystem in order to remove fragmentation. I guess running xfs_fsr would help more in that case. Did you try with that? > chunks are allocated of the size of 64k, It's a pity that there's no option to define how large each chunk should be. Using 1-50MB of real disk space for each new chunk could help a lot to keep the file less fragmented. It get's really funny when you run "defrag" within the VM on a sparse vdisk. mfg zmi -- // Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at // Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31 .network.your.ideas. // PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import" // Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4 // Keyserver: wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4 _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs