[Dirvish] Filesystems for big partitions

Michael Richardson michaelr at catalyst.net.nz
Thu Oct 8 19:54:29 UTC 2015


On Thu, October 8, 2015 8:54 pm, Paul Slootman wrote:
> I generally use ext4, as it performs well and predictably.
> Do the resize online and you don't need to perform the fsck (don't ask
> me about the reasoning behind that, I have no idea).
>
> I have had the most terrible problems with XFS as a filesystem for
> dirvish, a lot of bugs were triggered (this was a couple of years ago).


We've actually gone the other way, but for different reasons.  We use XFS
widely now, due to the 16 TB limit on ext4.  Performance tests on both
have come out reasonably similar, and we've not had any issues with XFS
(touch wood!).  We also use the concurrency patch for dirvish-runall[0]
(and a similar one for cleaning up expired vaults).

Cheers,
Mike

[0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=639326


-- 
Michael Richardson
Catalyst IT Limited
150-154 Willis Street, PO Box 11-053 Wellington New Zealand
DDI: ++64 4 803 2260
http://catalyst.net.nz
GPG: 0530 4686 F996 4E2C 5DC7 6327 5C98 5EED A302 9071



More information about the Dirvish mailing list