From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n67IDVEL159584 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:13:31 -0500 Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id B1D819F8EDE for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 11:21:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info (enyo.dsw2k3.info [195.71.86.239]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ANgMiRJqsVjM8XgQ for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:21:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 20:13:52 +0200 From: Matthias Schniedermeyer Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] default to inode64 on 64-bit systems Message-ID: <20090707181352.GA3357@citd.de> References: <4A52419E.5020301@sandeen.net> <20090707093802.GA32125@citd.de> <4A535650.7020309@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A535650.7020309@sandeen.net> 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs mailing list On 07.07.2009 09:06, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > > On 06.07.2009 13:25, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> I'm tiring of telling people to use the inode64 mount option > >> when they are experiencing bad performance on large xfs > >> filesystems... > >> > >> 32-bit userspace is still largely broken when it comes to still > >> using 32-bit stat calls, but on 64-bit systems this should be > >> safe. > >> > >> The only problem here is moving the disk onto a 32-bit system, or using > >> 32-bit apps. But I think it's a small risk. > >> > >> What do we think about the following? > > > > What is with people running 64bit kernel but 32bit Userspace? > > Good point. I wonder how many do that... hrm. I'd guess pretty much anybody who what's to utilize the amount of RAM you can have nowadays, but doesn't have any single program that needs that amount of memory. Or, like in my case, just needs it for tmpfs/buffer cache. Throw in some "i don't want to reinstall" or "my Distribution isn't biarch" and you have someone who justs recompils their kernel and be done with it. It took me only a few minutes (rotating my hardware around that day took way longer) Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs