[Dirvish] Paul's JFS experiment ( was: dirvish write error )
keithl at kl-ic.com
Wed Jul 27 14:12:42 PDT 2005
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 08:57:50PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> I've been doing some tests on a box with 24 400GB SATA disks... ext3
> doesn't even create filesystems larger than 8TB :-) reiserfs 3 oopses
> the kernel, reiser4 works fine, but I'm probably going with jfs as that
> gave the best performance.
Let us know how that works out. JFS is better than ext3, because
it has dynamic inode allocation (you don't run out of inodes). I
suspect it is safer and faster than reiserfs, but it does have
fixed block sizes, and I suspect that is less optimal for
directory-rich, heavily-hard-linked dirvish vaults.
I wonder if there is some kind of tool that can traverse a filesystem
and estimate what percentage of the space is occupied by directories?
For those of you wondering what we are talking about, here is an
overview of JFS, IBM's Journaling File System :
Keith Lofstrom keithl at keithl.com Voice (503)-520-1993
KLIC --- Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits --- "Your Ideas in Silicon"
Design Contracting in Bipolar and CMOS - Analog, Digital, and Scan ICs
More information about the Dirvish