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 252B57F37 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 17:08:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B291EAC001 for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:08:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from greer.hardwarefreak.com (mo-65-41-216-221.sta.embarqhsd.net [65.41.216.221]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id DXGImhP2YLcxGUDD for ; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 15:08:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51E32144.3020109@hardwarefreak.com> Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 17:08:04 -0500 From: Stan Hoeppner MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: specify agsize? References: <6A14EB72-A699-47AF-937D-D6DA1CF12ACB@gmail.com> <51E2092D.7090409@sandeen.net> <9AB8D1D3-29D7-4C43-A624-37024CA4EFD9@gmail.com> <51E2CE83.9080003@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <51E2CE83.9080003@sandeen.net> Reply-To: stan@hardwarefreak.com 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, aurfalien On 7/14/2013 11:14 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > http://wikihelp.autodesk.com/Creative_Finishing/enu/2012/Help/05_Installation_Guides/Installation_and_Configuration_Guide_for_Linux_Workstations/0118-Advanced118/0194-Manually194/0199-Creating199 > > I guess? > > That's quite a procedure! And I have to say, a slightly strange one at first glance. Agreed. > It'd be nice if they said what they were trying to accomplish rather than just giving you a long recipe. Again. > In the end, I think they are trying to create 128AGs and maybe work around some mkfs corner case or other. Or it's just as likely they are laying out these image frames in a specific manner across 128 directories, assuming 128 AGs exist, to achieve some specific "on disk" organization of the files. It's simply not possible to know without more information. Interestingly, on a 14+2 RAID6 array of 7.2K drives, normally 128 AGs will decrease parallel performance due to a huge increase in head seek latency. Thus I'd assume this isn't a parallel workload. Either that or Autodesk doesn't know XFS as well as they believe. -- Stan _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs