One disadvantage I've seen with XFS is that you cannot shrink [0] the file system. For a box dedicated to network storage this shouldn't be a problem. But in my instance I made /var a bit too large and needed to reclaim space for /.
[0] http://xfs.org/index.php/Shrinking_Support
---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 //
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:12 PM, John R Pierce pierce@hogranch.com wrote:
On 08/04/12 7:01 AM, ashkab rahmani wrote:
hello i have 16tb storage. 8x2tb sata raided. i want to share it on network via nfs. which file system is better for it?
we are using XFS with CentOS 6.latest on 80TB file systems, works quite well. handles a mix of many tiny files and very large files without any special tuning.
Theres one big issue with NFS that requires a workaround... XFS requires 64 bit inodes on a large file system ('inode64'), and by default, NFS wants to use the inode as the unique ID for the export, this doesn't work as that unique ID has to be 32 bits, so you have to manually specify a unique identifier for each share from a given server. I can't remember offhand what the specific option is, but you can specify 1, 2, 3, 4 for the share identifiers, or any other unique integer. if you only export the root of a file system, tis is not a problem. this problem is squarely an NFS implementation problem, that code should have been fixed eons ago.
-- 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