public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfs mount/create options (was: XFS status update for August 2010)
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 07:38:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201009080738.58483@zmi.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201009060749.01405@zmi.at>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2127 bytes --]

I just found that my questions from Monday were not solved, but this is 
interesting, so I want to warm it up again.

On Montag, 6. September 2010 Michael Monnerie wrote:
 I looked into man mkfs now, which brings up these questions:
 
 On Sonntag, 5. September 2010 Dave Chinner wrote:
 >         - relatime,logbufs=8,attr=2,barrier are all defaults.
 
 Why isn't logbsize=256k default, when it's suggested most of the time
 anyway? On machines with 32MiB or more 32k is the default, but most
 machines these days have multi-gigabytes of RAM, so at least for
 RAM>1GiB that could be made default.
 
 >         - largeio only affects stat(2) output if you have
 >           sunit/swidth set - unlikely on a laptop drive, and has
 >           no effect on unlink performance.
 >         - swalloc only affects allocation if sunit/swidth are set
 >           and has no effect on unlink performance.
 
 Hm, it seems I don't understand that. I tried now on different
  servers, using
 stat -f /disks/db --format '%s %S'
 4096 4096
 
 That filesystems were all created with su=64k,swidth=(values 4-8
 depending on RAID). So I retried specifying directly in the mount
 options: sunit=128,swidth=512
 and it still reports "4096" for %s - or is %s not the value I should
 look for? Some of the filesystems even have allocsize= specified,
  still always 4096 is given back. Where is my problem?
 
 And while I am at it: Why does "mount" not provide the su=/sw=
  options that we can use to create a filesystem? Would make life
  easier, as it's much easier to read su=64k,sw=7 than
  sunit=128,swidth=896.
 
 When I defined su/sw on mkfs, is it enough, or would I always have to
 specify sunit/swidth with every mount too?
 



-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-08  5:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-02 14:59 XFS status update for August 2010 Christoph Hellwig
2010-09-05  7:44 ` Willy Tarreau
2010-09-05  9:37   ` Michael Monnerie
2010-09-05 10:47     ` Willy Tarreau
2010-09-05 13:08       ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-05 18:56         ` Willy Tarreau
2010-09-05 23:36           ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-06  5:19             ` Willy Tarreau
2010-09-06  5:49         ` xfs mount/create options (was: XFS status update for August 2010) Michael Monnerie
2010-09-08  5:38           ` Michael Monnerie [this message]
2010-09-08 10:58             ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-08 13:38               ` Michael Monnerie
2010-09-08 14:51                 ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-08 15:24                   ` Emmanuel Florac
2010-09-08 23:34                     ` Michael Monnerie
2010-09-08 23:30                   ` Michael Monnerie
2010-09-09  7:27                     ` Dave Chinner
2010-09-09  8:29                       ` Michael Monnerie
2010-09-06  3:22     ` XFS status update for August 2010 Eric Sandeen
2010-09-06  5:10       ` Michael Monnerie
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-09-06 22:55 xfs mount/create options (was: XFS status update for August 2010) Richard Scobie
2010-09-06 23:31 ` Michael Monnerie

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201009080738.58483@zmi.at \
    --to=michael.monnerie@is.it-management.at \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox