[CentOS] Calling All FS Fanatics
feizhou at graffiti.net
Thu Oct 5 04:05:52 UTC 2006
> I finally figured out my slowdown problem: I had somehow turned off
> write-caching on the 3Ware controller. Hoo-Boy! Does that kill
> throughput! What the heck is that option for anyway?
For cases where you do not want to lose your data when you get a
blackout. If you do not have a battery power backup for your cache, you
will lose data that is in the cache that has not been committed to the
> Here are a handful of bonnie++ benchmarks, I decided to just quote the
> block write and block read numbers:
> Write Read
> XFS: 231 202
> ext2, dir_index:
> 221 205
> ext3, dir_index, data=ordered:
> 80 196
> ext3, dir_index, data=writeback:
> 95 199
> ext3, data=writeback:
> 95 201
> As you hinted, ext2 has almost the same performance as XFS.
> Data=writeback on ext3 helps some but not a whole lot. Dir_index doesn't
> seem to do a thing.
Indexes directories are only useful for cases where there are thousands
of files in a directory and you want to access a single file (and you
know the name in advance) quickly.
> I'm really torn here. I can make use of the extra write speeds of ext2
> or XFS. But is XFS stable and supported enough for 'production' use?
> Will I regret a forced fsck on a 1TB ext2 volume?
Are you using the no write cache flag with bonnie++? Otherwise you may
not get the same results from whatever it is that you are running.
> Steve, you say you've been happy with XFS for a few years. Have you been
> using it under any kind of load?
Run XFS without write caching and you should be safe. Are you creating
thousands of files?
More information about the CentOS