On Tuesday 03 October 2006 22:36, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: > On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 at 3:31pm, Steve Bergman wrote > > > On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 22:13 +0200, Morten Torstensen wrote: > >> Bottom line is that I agree with Johnny... if you positively don't > >> *need* another filesystem, use ext3. > > > > Plus, I have a notion that the "interaction between ext3 and 3ware > > raid5" referenced in the previous episode, might just have something to > > do with ext3's ordered data writes, which can be turned off. > > Oh, I tested ext3 vs. 3ware RAID5 in *multitudes* of configurations -- all > 3 different journaling configs, external journals, various size journals, > etc. Nothing helped. There's just some bad juju there. On the same > hardware, XFS and even ext2 pulled far better than numbers than ext3. > Put the 3ware in RAID10 (or use md), though, and ext3 worked just fine > with it. > > Trust me, it wasn't for lack of trying. Like Joshua I've tried many different configs, different kernels, different journal modes, etc... 3ware + raid5 + ext3 just isn't very fast. /Peter -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20061004/7ea53f98/attachment-0004.sig>