[CentOS] 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

[SilverTip257]

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