Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Carlos Carvalho wrote: I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel tree) is faster with reiser3. My current main concern about XFS

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Moshe Yudkowsky schrieb: Carlos Carvalho wrote: I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel tree) is faster with reiser3. My

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Moshe Yudkowsky wrote: Carlos Carvalho wrote: I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel tree) is faster with reiser3. My current

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 05:34:14AM -0600, Moshe Yudkowsky wrote: Carlos Carvalho wrote: I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

On Jan 20, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Bill Davidsen wrote: One partitionable RAID-10, perhaps, then partition as needed. Read the discussion here about performance of LVM and RAID. I personally don't do LVM unless I know I will have to have great flexibility of configuration and can give up

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Moshe Yudkowsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 20 January 2008 21:19: Thanks for the tips, and in particular: Iustin Pop wrote: - if you download torrents, fragmentation is a real problem, so use a filesystem that knows how to preallocate space (XFS and maybe ext4; for XFS use

One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Question: with the same number of physical drives, do I get better performance with one large md-based drive, or do I get better performance if I have several smaller md-based drives? Situation: dual CPU, 4 drives (which I will set up as RAID-1 after being terrorized by the anti-RAID-5

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

On Sun, Jan 20, 2008 at 02:24:46PM -0600, Moshe Yudkowsky wrote: Question: with the same number of physical drives, do I get better performance with one large md-based drive, or do I get better performance if I have several smaller md-based drives? No expert here, but my opinion: - md

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Moshe Yudkowsky wrote: Question: with the same number of physical drives, do I get better performance with one large md-based drive, or do I get better performance if I have several smaller md-based drives? Situation: dual CPU, 4 drives (which I will set up as RAID-1 after being terrorized

Re: One Large md or Many Smaller md for Better Peformance?

Thanks for the tips, and in particular: Iustin Pop wrote: - if you download torrents, fragmentation is a real problem, so use a filesystem that knows how to preallocate space (XFS and maybe ext4; for XFS use xfs_io to set a bigger extend size for where you download) That's a