On 01.03.2019 03:56, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Hello, > > I think the filesystems address in Logical blocks, so this is the size which > should match. > > However the physical size might be relevant for alignment/sizing decisions of > mkfs (but you would expect the to be encoded in the metadata of the > filesystem so you can transport them (losing proper alignment which might > affect Performance or robustness). > > For ext3/4 I think the mkfs will use -b 4k by Default if your FS is at least > 0,5GB. That may make a difference. My tests were with relatively small volumes, so it might not be using -b 4k due to the size of the volume? > > BTW: some applications (like SQL Server) also care about the physical size to > make sure they always write complete sectors in transactions and avoid > read-modify-write scenarios. > > Gruss > Bernd >
-- Ingo Franzki eMail: [email protected] Tel: ++49 (0)7031-16-4648 Fax: ++49 (0)7031-16-3456 Linux on IBM Z Development, Schoenaicher Str. 220, 71032 Boeblingen, Germany IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Matthias Hartmann Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 IBM DATA Privacy Statement: https://www.ibm.com/privacy/us/en/ _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
