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 n67E5YPh147997 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 09:05:34 -0500 Received: from mail.sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 7B660349147 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 07:06:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id VKCHSocrRgRbDxdL for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:06:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A535650.7020309@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:06:08 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] default to inode64 on 64-bit systems References: <4A52419E.5020301@sandeen.net> <20090707093802.GA32125@citd.de> In-Reply-To: <20090707093802.GA32125@citd.de> 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: Matthias Schniedermeyer Cc: xfs mailing list 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. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs