On 4/28/05, Tzahi Fadida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is my understanding that XFS mechanism do a lot of caching to memory > to achieve good performance. This is a consideration between stability > in the case of catastrophy to performance.
2 x PSU, 2 x UPS and a generator should take care of power issues. How about day to day stability in high I/O? I had bad experience with ext3 on mail stores (small files) and virtual tapes (large files) even without crashes. > > Regards, > tzahi. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gil Freund > > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:56 PM > > To: IGLU Mailing list > > Subject: VMware GSX host file systems > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I am planning on deploying VMware GSX on a Debian system. > > While I am happy with ReiserFS for most FS needs, I am > > wondering if it would make sense to user XFS or JFS for the > > VM image partition, as it seems both perform better with large files. > > > > On a side note, can anyone share information on performance > > of the ESX product vs. the GSX product on Linux? Aside from > > memory over-committing, most ESX functions (such as vMotion) > > are not relevant to me. > > > > Thanks > > > > Gil > > > > ====================== > > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run > > the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > ================================================================To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
