On 1/12/11, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote:
I didn't bring up experimental software - I thought that's what he was
using. I misread.
And it worked quite well, except for write speeds. There are some cool
features with zfs.
http://www.redhat.com/rhel/compare/
As it stands,
16/25/100 TB
Hey I've been watching the thread on and off. How large in the file
system you are trying to share? What will it / they be used?
--
Thanks,
Gene Brandt SCSA
8625 Carriage Road
River Ridge, LA 70123
home 504-737-4295
cell 504-452-3250
Family Web Page | My Web Page | LinkedIn | Facebook
Hey I've been watching the thread on and off. How large in the file system
you are trying to share? What will it / they be used?
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2011-January/thread.html
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2011-January/104184.html
On Jan 12, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Gene Brandt wrote:
Hey I've been watching the thread on and off. How large in the file
system you are trying to share? What will it / they be used?
Home dirs which are low/medium bandwidth and other low bandwidth data.
Basically 3 individual NFS exports.
On 01/11/2011 01:47 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
Wondering what you all thought of using ext4 over XFS.
I've been a big XFS fan for years as I'm an Irix transplant but would
like your opinions.
This 30TB drive will be an NFS exported
XFS is safe - lots of protection for your data, but it cuts write speeds in
half.
Ext4 does not slow things down...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Jan 11, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Digimer wrote:
On 01/11/2011 01:47 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
Wondering what you all thought of using ext4 over XFS.
I've been a big XFS fan for years as I'm an Irix transplant but would
like your opinions.
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 at 1:49pm, Digimer wrote
On 01/11/2011 01:47 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
Wondering what you all thought of using ext4 over XFS.
I've been a big XFS fan for years as I'm an Irix transplant but would
like your opinions.
On 01/11/2011 10:56 AM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
I read where ext4 supports 1EB partition size
The format supports it - the e2fsprogs tools do not. 16TB is the
practical limit.
--
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
I use ext4 on my tiny 8TB arrays. Centos 5.5 does support it, although the
gui tools have small issues with it.
Centos 6 should support it better...
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:47 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
Wondering what you all thought of using ext4 over XFS.
I've been a big XFS fan for years as I'm an Irix transplant but would
like your opinions.
This 30TB drive will be an NFS
On Jan 11, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
On 01/11/2011 10:56 AM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
I read where ext4 supports 1EB partition size
The format supports it - the e2fsprogs tools do not. 16TB is the
practical limit.
Have you installed e4fsprogs?
- aurf
On Jan 11, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 at 1:49pm, Digimer wrote
On 01/11/2011 01:47 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
Wondering what you all thought of using ext4 over XFS.
I've been a big XFS fan for
On 01/11/2011 11:07 AM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 11, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
On 01/11/2011 10:56 AM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
I read where ext4 supports 1EB partition size
The format supports it - the e2fsprogs tools do not. 16TB is the
practical limit.
Have
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 at 11:12am, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote
My RAID has a strip size of of 32KB and a block size of 512bytes.
I've usually just done blind XFS formats but would like to tune it for
smaller files. Of course big/small is relative but in my env, small
means sub 300MB or so.
On Tuesday, January 11, 2011 01:47:33 pm aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
Wondering what you all thought of using ext4 over XFS.
XFS. But make sure you're using a 64-bit CentOS. 32-bit CentOS (at least C5
of six months or so ago) will in fact run mkfs.xfs
- Original Message -
| On Jan 11, 2011, at 10:59 AM, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
|
| On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 at 1:49pm, Digimer wrote
|
| On 01/11/2011 01:47 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| I've a 30TB hardware based RAID array.
|
| Wondering what you all thought of using
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011 02:55 AM, compdoc wrote:
XFS is safe - lots of protection for your data, but it cuts write speeds in
half.
When did XFS start looking like reiserfs?
Lots of protection for your data? Let's see, super aggressive caching
and no data journaling only metadata
Lots of protection for your data? Let's see, super aggressive caching and
no data journaling only metadata journaling, what on earth are you
blabbering about?
Use XFS with anything that has no BBU cache support or barrier support and
recent files are toast when there is a crash or sudden power
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011 08:51 AM, compdoc wrote:
Lots of protection for your data? Let's see, super aggressive caching and
no data journaling only metadata journaling, what on earth are you
blabbering about?
Use XFS with anything that has no BBU cache support or barrier support and
On 01/11/2011 08:00 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011 08:51 AM, compdoc wrote:
Lots of protection for your data? Let's see, super aggressive caching and
no data journaling only metadata journaling, what on earth are you
blabbering about?
Use XFS with anything that
On Jan 11, 2011, at 7:51 PM, compdoc comp...@hotrodpc.com wrote:
Lots of protection for your data? Let's see, super aggressive caching and
no data journaling only metadata journaling, what on earth are you
blabbering about?
Use XFS with anything that has no BBU cache support or barrier
On Jan 11, 2011, at 5:17 PM, Digimer wrote:
On 01/11/2011 08:00 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011 08:51 AM, compdoc wrote:
Lots of protection for your data? Let's see, super aggressive
caching and
no data journaling only metadata journaling, what on earth are you
I never said it was native. zfs-fuse.x86_64
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:07 AM, compdoc wrote:
I never said it was native. zfs-fuse.x86_64
Not a Centos or a RHEL package. Please don't bring up experimental
software in threads that are comparing filesystems for production use.
If you want to suggest ZFS, you should suggest that the
I didn't bring up experimental software - I thought that's what he was
using. I misread.
And it worked quite well, except for write speeds. There are some cool
features with zfs.
Trying to decide just what file system to use for these larger and larger
arrays is something I've been facing very
On Jan 11, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Christopher Chan wrote:
On Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:07 AM, compdoc wrote:
I never said it was native. zfs-fuse.x86_64
Not a Centos or a RHEL package. Please don't bring up experimental
software in threads that are comparing filesystems for production use.
zfs-fuse.x86_64 is from epel - at least some users trust that repo.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:42:55PM -0700, compdoc wrote:
zfs-fuse.x86_64 is from epel - at least some users trust that repo.
EPEL is very trustworthy, but I for one wouldn't use ZFS fuse for
anything Enterprise (though I would use it for testing, or personal
use).
As an aside, a company called
29 matches
Mail list logo
