On Mon 13 Aug 2012 08:28:15 PM IST, Michael Hampicke wrote:
I guess traversing through directories may be faster with XFS,
but in my experience ext4 perfoms better than XFS in regard to
operations (cp, rm) on small files.
I read that there are some tuning options for XFS and small
files, but never tried it.
But if somone seconds XFS I will try it too.
It's been a while since I messed with this but isn't XFS the one
that hates power failures and such?
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Well, it's the delayed allocation of XFS (which prevents
fragmentation) that does not like sudden power losses
But ext4 has
that too, you can disable it though - that should be true for XFS too.
But the power situation in the datacenter has never been a problem so
far, and even if the cache partition get's screwed, we can always
rebuild it. Takes a few hours, but it would not be the end of the world
Yes, XFS hates power failures. I got a giant UPS for my home desktop to
use XFS because of it's excellent performance ;-)