Les Mikesell schrieb: > Christoph Litauer wrote: >>> >> Thanks a lot Adam! >> In the meantime I discussed my problem on the xfs mailing list. We are >> not finished yet, but adding mount option "nobarrier" reduced my >> performance problems significantly. I am still in contact to clarify >> if it's possible to optimize the usage of inode allocation groups. We >> will see ... >> > > Filesystem optimization that tries to allocate files or inodes near > their containing directory isn't likely to help with backuppc since most > directory entries end up being hard links to content in some more or > less random location - wherever the first copy was stored. >
Full acknowledge! xfs supports a mount option inode64 which - according to the xfs mailing list - would avoid the search for "near inodes". But inode64 is only available on 64 bit systems ... -- Regards Christoph ________________________________________________________________________ Christoph Litauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Uni Koblenz, Computing Center, http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~litauer Postfach 201602, 56016 Koblenz Fon: +49 261 287-1311, Fax: -100 1311 PGP-Fingerprint: F39C E314 2650 650D 8092 9514 3A56 FBD8 79E3 27B2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
