From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o28M9Wue074945 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 16:09:33 -0600 Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 1DA6F18F22CD for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 14:11:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info (enyo.dsw2k3.info [195.71.86.239]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id OA2uNZMJzwVl6jwX for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:11:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by enyo.dsw2k3.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D9D098C3B4 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 23:11:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (enyo.dsw2k3.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 8c8OXPuuIoyO for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 23:10:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from citd.de (p4FC4C439.dip.t-dialin.net [79.196.196.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by enyo.dsw2k3.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8153898C3A4 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 23:10:54 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 23:10:44 +0100 From: Matthias Schniedermeyer Subject: What are the correct mkfs.xfs parameters for a lying WD-EARS HDD? Message-ID: <20100308221044.GA17830@citd.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline 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 Hi More than a month ago i bought 4 Western Digital WD15EARS (1.5 TB) which are (AFAIK) the first general/commercial available 4k sector SATA-HDDs. Unfortunatly the HDDs lie about the 4k physical sector size and the most prominent drawback is a worse than abysmal delete performance. ("Normal" Read & Write-performance is OK) So if i wanted to (re-)mkfs the filesystems what would the correct parameters be? Kernel/Userspace is pretty recent (Debian-SID): mkfs.xfs version 3.1.1, kernel v2.6.33, util-linux 2.16.0 Not that that should matter when the HDDs lies. 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