| 1 |
Reiserfs3 is great for large volume of small files but why aren't you |
| 2 |
checking out ReiserFS4? XFS and RFS4 run very close in performance. |
| 3 |
Really depends on whether this is a production or evaluation environment. |
| 4 |
I'm running RFS4 myself and found it particularly fast and stable. Also |
| 5 |
we have a high number of files with probably 200Gb of file under 4Kb |
| 6 |
and then another 300GB of files around the 6 - 10Mb mark. Performance with |
| 7 |
RFS4 is improved and recovery definitely quicker |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Davin "BigD" George |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
----- Original Message ----- |
| 12 |
From: Wes Kurdziolek <xunil@×××××××××.com> |
| 13 |
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 11:46:50 -0400 |
| 14 |
To: gentoo-server@l.g.o |
| 15 |
Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] For a 1.5TB server running Samba and NFS ONLY,what's the best kernel? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> I've seen some benchmarking that suggests XFS is excellent wrt large |
| 18 |
> files. Reiserfs3 really shines when it comes to lots of little files in |
| 19 |
> lots of directories, but it can hold its own w/ lots of big files. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> David Wuertele wrote: |
| 22 |
> > I'm rebuilding my terabyte file server from scratch. Previously I |
| 23 |
> > used "emerge gs-sources" to get my kernel, but I'm considering using |
| 24 |
> > the performance-tuned "emerge gentoo-sources" this time. |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > I want maximum performance and reliability in these areas: |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> > on-board Via IDE controller |
| 29 |
> > multiple SIIG ATA-133 PCI IDE controllers |
| 30 |
> > 7-drive RAID5 array |
| 31 |
> > 1.5TB Reiserfs partition |
| 32 |
> > Average file size about 50MB, largest files will commonly exceed 2GB |
| 33 |
> > Samba file sharing |
| 34 |
> > NFS file sharing |
| 35 |
> > |
| 36 |
> > All other areas are of little or no consequence. |
| 37 |
> > Any recommendations? |
| 38 |
> > |
| 39 |
> > Thanks, |
| 40 |
> > Dave |
| 41 |
> > |
Archives