From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FA1F7CA3 for ; Sat, 2 Jul 2016 14:50:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234F48F8035 for ; Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.clear.net.nz (smtp5.clear.net.nz [203.97.33.68]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id B7Dd2DhV8pPaiSWq for ; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 12:50:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxin2-orange.clear.net.nz (lb1-srcnat.clear.net.nz [203.97.32.236]) by smtp5.clear.net.nz (CLEAR Net Mail) with ESMTP id <0O9P00HLMDQLLAGN@smtp5.clear.net.nz> for xfs@oss.sgi.com; Sun, 03 Jul 2016 07:49:59 +1200 (NZST) Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2016 07:49:58 +1200 From: Richard Scobie Subject: Re: High Fragmentation with XFS and NFS Sync Message-id: <57781AE6.10605@clear.net.nz> MIME-version: 1.0 List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com Nick Fisk wrote: "So it looks like each parallel IO thread is being allocated next to each other rather than at spaced out regions of the disk." It's possible that the "filestreams" XFS mount option may help you out. See: http://www.xfs.org/docs/xfsdocs-xml-dev/XFS_User_Guide/tmp/en-US/html/ch06s16.html Regards, Richard _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs