From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B7C27F98 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:27:39 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 15:27:35 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: Help with XFS in VMs on VMFS Message-ID: <20130329202735.GX22182@sgi.com> References: <51549F09.1090109@hardwarefreak.com> <20130328214550.GA3771@pirx.askja.de> <5154E6AC.9020402@hardwarefreak.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jan Perci Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Hi Jan, On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:30:01PM -0400, Jan Perci wrote: > Back to XFS, in this context, is there any benefit in tuning some > parameters to get better performance, or will it all just be overshadowed > by poor performance of the VMDKs that tuning isn't worthwhile? At least get your stripe unit and width correct. http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_How_to_calculate_the_correct_sunit.2Cswidth_values_for_optimal_performance Beyond that I suggest you stick with the defaults unless you have a specific need. e.g. heavy usage of extended attributes might prompt you to use a larger inode size to keep them inline. Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs