| 1 |
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:32 AM Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Time for plan B. I expect a drive purchase soon. $$$ Heck, it would |
| 4 |
> be faster to do backups, redo the whole thing and copy it all back. I |
| 5 |
> could copy it in chunks. First chunk gets me running and then copy |
| 6 |
> remaining stuff. Hmmmmm. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
If you start having large volumes of data it probably makes sense to |
| 9 |
split that off and handle it differently. I am storing my large stuff |
| 10 |
on lizardfs for this reason (though if starting today I'd take another |
| 11 |
look at moosefs or ceph). When you don't care so much about IOPS, or |
| 12 |
efficiency of small files, there are a lot of constraints you can |
| 13 |
avoid with ext4. Distributed filesystems also have scaling benefits |
| 14 |
because you don't have to try to cram your 10 hard drives into a |
| 15 |
single host. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Ext4 can be grown online, but it can't be shrunk online. When you |
| 18 |
start getting to large filesystems you need to consider |
| 19 |
backup/restoration time and if you want availability you really want |
| 20 |
solutions that feature RAID and which can do all the operations you |
| 21 |
need online. Simply having a backup might not be satisfactory if your |
| 22 |
backup requires dozens of hours to restore, except as a last resort. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Rich |
Archives