On Sun, 6 Nov 2005, Michael Loftis wrote:
I'd also be VERY interested since our experience was quite the opposite.
ReiserFS was faster than all three, XFS trailing a dismal third (also had
corruption issues) and ext3 second or even more dismal third, depending on if
you ignored it's wretched large directory performance or not. ReiserFS
performed solidly and predictably in all tests. Not the same could be said
for XFS and ext3. This was about 2 yrs ago though.
Make sure that you format ext3 partitions with dir_index which improves
large directory performance. You'll probably also want to increase the
number of inodes. Here is what I used:
mkfs -t ext3 -j -m 1 -O dir_index /dev/sdb1
tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/sdb1
This was on an 800GB Dell/EMC Cx500 array.
Andy
----
Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus
Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu
List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
