From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C75941381F4 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:23:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 952B221C02E; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:23:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gh0-f181.google.com (mail-gh0-f181.google.com [209.85.160.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750ACE07D8 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:21:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ghz3 with SMTP id 3so3407261ghz.40 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:21:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :x-gm-message-state; bh=JNNIp8TnkXWILPH4T8/BNEFYy8aMBl5bnNW0mdp3rmc=; b=XznOlqzgmoA+SfCa588vzU4PzwNo/sVm2+fLhD8a5YjGPdBGvIMpNhkyp7st6FGvz5 jHCdjNzrNAUi1CGRxxOaTn09RQRa+6/py2LeRZQvIFHgH+walXKsH1Q6G9QaeyV5392A rT0trh1227yrdYh682xZtSyuPS1VY2e8GjQBFjbOS4TjpFKIv+j1TRmRtlYBHOs6Sa4n DKILSXp9gZqRY2TlM6j9JVfbIMzRJX1m5TvmZtaofglOA+xPEE17w0fvlqXrcIlU240Y IVEF4g2RVGMiWe9ZsLduEAoIJRTi7De0asXOe4TG9RHXBipyEL+ltHy4/o2NbC0ewAVu zIJA== Received: by 10.68.227.70 with SMTP id ry6mr18859006pbc.53.1344871289463; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.45] ([121.246.205.20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ns7sm5384616pbc.40.2012.08.13.08.21.27 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Nilesh Govindrajan Message-ID: <50291B56.9000506@nileshgr.com> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 20:50:54 +0530 From: Nilesh Govindrajan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120728 Thunderbird/14.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Fast file system for cache directory with lot's of files References: <5028FF82.7020908@nileshgr.com> <502911C6.5070107@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwg3GTqNhmb0z7r4x/WMgtJo7iLMbIn0JsxQWF83jZDG4Bnuqrg4VfJQbDak0iaNGh52TS X-Archives-Salt: b7b56a42-5f1f-44f1-965d-ee0fddbc470e X-Archives-Hash: c0bdffb8d9baf53ed8629ff53abc8042 On Mon 13 Aug 2012 08:28:15 PM IST, Michael Hampicke wrote: >> I guess traversing through directories may be faster with XFS, >> but in my experience ext4 perfoms better than XFS in regard to >> operations (cp, rm) on small files. >> I read that there are some tuning options for XFS and small >> files, but never tried it. >> >> But if somone seconds XFS I will try it too. > > It's been a while since I messed with this but isn't XFS the one > that hates power failures and such? > > Dale > > :-) :-) > > -- > I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! > > Well, it's the delayed allocation of XFS (which prevents > fragmentation) that does not like sudden power losses :) But ext4 has > that too, you can disable it though - that should be true for XFS too. > But the power situation in the datacenter has never been a problem so > far, and even if the cache partition get's screwed, we can always > rebuild it. Takes a few hours, but it would not be the end of the world :) Yes, XFS hates power failures. I got a giant UPS for my home desktop to use XFS because of it's excellent performance ;-) -- Nilesh Govindrajan http://nileshgr.com