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 at 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 at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos