FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-27-2012, 08:52 AM
Nux!
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

On 27.09.2012 09:10, Rafał Radecki wrote:
> Hi All.
>
> I have a CentOS server:
>
> CentOS 5.6 x86_64
> 2.6.18-238.12.1.el5.centos.plus
> e4fsprogs-1.41.12-2.el5.x86_64
>
> which has a 11TB ext4 filesystem. I have problems with running fsck
> on it
> and would like to change the filesystem because I do not like the
> possibility of running long fsck on it, it's a production machine.
> Also I
> have some problems with running fsck (not enough RAM, problem with
> scratch_files option) and if the filesystem will need intervention I
> will
> be in a problematic situation.
>
> Which other mature and stable filesystem can you recommend for such
> large
> storage?

Never had to deal with such a large filesystem, yet, but I'd try XFS on
it.

Alternatively you can look at less supported filesystems such as BTRFS.
Or even http://zfsonlinux.org/.

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:08 AM
John R Pierce
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

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@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:23 AM
joel billy
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

>> Which other mature and stable filesystem can you recommend for such
>> large
>> storage?
>
> Never had to deal with such a large filesystem, yet, but I'd try XFS on
> it.
>
> Alternatively you can look at less supported filesystems such as BTRFS.
> Or even http://zfsonlinux.org/.
>

Since its for production, i would avoid both zfs and btrfs. But i
guess there aren't many options available a.t.m. Best is to wait for
btrfs to be production ready.

Wouldn't splitting the 11TB filesystem to smaller filesystems work ?
You wont able able to avoid the fsck or disruption in service, but
atleast you can bring up critical mounts faster.

- jb
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:36 AM
Leon Fauster
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

Am 27.09.2012 um 10:10 schrieb Rafał Radecki:

> Hi All.
>
> I have a CentOS server:
>
> CentOS 5.6 x86_64
> 2.6.18-238.12.1.el5.centos.plus
> e4fsprogs-1.41.12-2.el5.x86_64
>
> which has a 11TB ext4 filesystem. I have problems with running fsck on it
> and would like to change the filesystem because I do not like the
> possibility of running long fsck on it, it's a production machine. Also I
> have some problems with running fsck (not enough RAM, problem with
> scratch_files option) and if the filesystem will need intervention I will
> be in a problematic situation.
>
> Which other mature and stable filesystem can you recommend for such large
> storage?

what about:

$ man tune2fs

"maximum / mount count / time" can be changed.

and to boot "faster" just do

$ touch /fastboot
$ reboot

--
LF



_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:38 AM
Fernando Cassia
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Nux! <nux@li.nux.ro> wrote:

> Alternatively you can look at less supported filesystems such as BTRFS.

What do you mean by "less suported" ?

https://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/linuxcon-japan/bo
---
LinuxCon Japan 2012 | Presentations
"On The Way to a Healthy Btrfs Towards Enterprise"
by Liu Bo, Fujitsu
---

Let me quote:
"Btrfs has been on full development for about 5 years and it does make
lots of progress on both features and performance, but why does
everybody keep tagging it with ""experimental""? And why do people
still think of it as a vulnerable one for production use? As a goal of
production use, we have been strengthening several features, making
improvements on performance and keeping fixing bugs to make btrfs
stable, for instance, ""snapshot aware defrag"", ""extent buffer
cache"", ""rbtree lock contention"", etc. This talk will cover the
above"
---

From its web "Liu Bo has been working on linux kernel development
since late 2010 as a Fujitsu engineer. He has been working on
filesystem field and he's now focusing on btrfs development".

RHEL 7 to get Btrfs support
http://www.h-online.com/open/imgs/45/8/8/4/6/5/1/43-6b4e69889ee000ca.png

"RHEL 7 will support ext4, XFS, and Btrfs (boot and data)"

Then you have SuSE:
https://www.suse.com/releasenotes/x86_64/SUSE-SLES/11-SP2/

"With SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 SP2, the btrfs file system joins ext3,
reiserfs, xfs and ocfs2 as *commercially supported file systems*. Each
file system offers disctinct advantages. While the installation
default is ext3, we recommend xfs when maximizing data performance is
desired, and *btrfs as a root file system when snapshotting and
rollback capabilities are required. Btrfs is supported as a root file
system (i.e. the file system for the operating system) across all
architectures of SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 SP2*. "

https://blogs.oracle.com/wim/entry/oracle_linux_6_update_3

"OL6.3 that boots up uek (2.6.39-200.24.1) as install kernel and uses
btrfs as the default filesystem for installation. So latest and
greatest direct access to btrfs, a modern well-tested, current kernel,
freely available. "

So, again, whatdya mean by "less supported"?. Its in the mainline
kernel since February so with the adoption by RHEL 7, itll become
mainstream sooner rather than later...

Just my $0.02...
FC
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:47 AM
joel billy
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

On 9/27/12, Fernando Cassia <fcassia@gmail.com> wrote:

> So, again, whatdya mean by "less supported"?. Its in the mainline
> kernel since February so with the adoption by RHEL 7, itll become
> mainstream sooner rather than later...
>
> Just my $0.02...

Thats the whole point isn't it. Until RHEL includes its (rather than
as a technology preview), you probably shouldn't use it as a
production file system and definitely not with the 5.x CentOS the OP
is using

- jb
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:59 AM
Morgan Cox
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

You should upgrade to a newer kernel - there are lots of improvements
to ext4 since the rhel5 kernel...

rhel/centos 6 is a start but if you don't need rhel/centos you could
try Ubuntu 12.04 to see how the 3.2.x kernel handles it.
cheers



On 27 September 2012 10:47, joel billy <jbilly2002@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/12, Fernando Cassia <fcassia@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So, again, whatdya mean by "less supported"?. Its in the mainline
>> kernel since February so with the adoption by RHEL 7, itll become
>> mainstream sooner rather than later...
>>
>> Just my $0.02...
>
> Thats the whole point isn't it. Until RHEL includes its (rather than
> as a technology preview), you probably shouldn't use it as a
> production file system and definitely not with the 5.x CentOS the OP
> is using
>
> - jb
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 10:23 AM
Bent Terp
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Rafał Radecki <radecki.rafal@gmail.com>wrote:

> Which other mature and stable filesystem can you recommend for such large
> storage?
>
>
I recommend XFS

BR Bent
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 10:40 AM
Nux!
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

On 27.09.2012 10:08, John R Pierce 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?!?)

Oh yeah, definitely upgrade to Centos 6. Maybe even go for the elrepo
kernel-ml a go, too. They usually provide the latest.

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 09-27-2012, 12:46 PM
SilverTip257
 
Default 11TB ext4 filesystem - filesystem alternatives?

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@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@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:16 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org