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 SMTP id p3BKXu91111473 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:33:56 -0500 Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with SMTP id 5958F1B6A8E8 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:37:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (mo-65-41-216-221.sta.embarqhsd.net [65.41.216.221]) by cuda.sgi.com with SMTP id UBhUOBY3I3DJvnRE for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:37:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4DA36676.1070206@hardwarefreak.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:37:10 -0500 From: Stan Hoeppner MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 2 question about XFS fragmentation and _fsr References: 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 Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Janos Haar Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Janos Haar put forth on 4/11/2011 12:39 PM: > In the result, actually we have >6TB images on the 3TB disk, wich is > 97.9% fragmented. How much free space does the filesystem have? How big is each image file? For xfs_fsr to work properly it must have sufficient free space in the filesystem. > Basically the sparse RAW disk images should be more faster accessible > than the original drive, because this is 4disk raid, instead of one, AND > the head don't need to travel through the empty space of the drive... It sounds like you may have some other issues besides filesystem fragmentation. > The XFS_FSR can be good for me or not? If you have plenty of free space. > Question 2: > One of our customers have one storage wich is exactly the same like the > one wich is described on the Q1, but only used for samba storage for > storing media files (big files.) Writing large files sequentially shouldn't cause fragmentation. > I am sure, there is no torrent or similar, and i have told to the > customers on the beginning "don't write more files parallel, to avoid > fragmentation", but today the storage is >95% fragmented. > The customer sad, he only does file write one by one, and nothing more. > How can this be? What were the mkfs.xfs arguments you used when creating these filesystem? Please share xfs_info output for the filesystems in question, and details of the underlying hardware RAID storage. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs