Hi I found OCFS2 comes with a higher overhead than local fs.
A 5G disk formatted OCFS2 left 3.92G available. And a 161G one left 156G available. I found a same question four years ago: https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/ocfs2-users/2013-April/006015.html But the answer is not a precise calculation. Or without a calculation, which arguments of mkfs.ocfs2 affects the overhead? Filesystems formatted via: 'mkfs' '-t' 'ocfs2' '-b' '4K' '-C' '1M' '-N' '16' '-F' "--fs-features=noappend-dio" DLKDEV Thanks, -robin
_______________________________________________ Ocfs2-users mailing list Ocfs2-users@oss.oracle.com https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-users
