Hello,
One day our servers farm rebooted unexpectedly (power fail happened) and on centos 6.3 with up2date kernel we lost few hundred files (which probably was opened for reading, NOT writing) on XFS.
Unexpected power lost follow to situation when some files get a zero size.
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:34 AM, SilverTip257 silvertip257@gmail.com wrote:
Current CentOS 6 is 2.6.32, not 2.6.36
In that XFS Youtube video, Dave Chinner says upstream 3.0 kernel or RHEL 6.2 [at 45:20 of the video].
Other sources [0] [1] agree.
[0] http://lwn.net/Articles/476616/ [1] http://jira.funtoo.org/browse/FL-38
---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 //
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:46 AM, SilverTip257 silvertip257@gmail.com wrote:
Definitely shoot for CentOS 6.3 ...
XFS with a kernel _more recent_ than 2.6.36 (currently shipped with CentOS6) has more improvements to the XFS code. Youtube video on XFS [0] - I believe the kernel version noted is 2.6.39 (watch the video!) [2].
And there's also a Youtube video on BTRFS [1] that was linked to/shared by Fernando.
[0] http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2012-August/128119.html [1] http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2012-August/128110.html [2] http://lwn.net/Articles/438671/
---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 //
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 5:08 AM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 09/27/12 1:52 AM, Nux! wrote:
Never had to deal with such a large filesystem, yet, but I'd try XFS on it.
XFS is fairly memory intensive. 11TB file systems tend to mean millions and millions of files.
frankly, I wouldn't run this on CentOS 5.6, I would upgrade to CentOS 6.latest and then I would use XFS.... support for EXT4 and XFS is rather sketchy with the old kernel in 5.x (and why aren't you at 5.8 or whatever is current in the 5 series anyways?!?)
-- john r pierce N 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos