[Gluster-devel] Namespace cache size ratio

Amar S. Tumballi amar at zresearch.com
Wed Nov 26 06:28:48 UTC 2008

Hi Daniel,

2008/11/25 Daniel van Ham Colchete <daniel.colchete at gmail.com>

> Yesterday I started the tests and what I'm learning is really making it
> worth. I will send all the results latter but for now the biggest find is
> that the XFS filesystem of *the* best for maildir storage in comprassion
> from Ext3 in my case. I'll put all the results in the wiki in a few days (I
> can do it, right?).

Thats nice to know. Surely you are welcome to contribute to wiki.

> I have a question here. It's easy to test but I would like to hear from a
> more experienced person. Say I use everything XFS for everything and I have
> 4 storages with 2TB each (after RAID10), I'll do Unify+AFR using GlusterFS
> version 1.3.12. So it will give-me 4TB of usable data. I'll store a lot of
> files, averaging 14KB for each file. What partition size should I use for
> the namespace cache (I'll do AFR on it too)? 40GB (1%) is enought? More?
> Less?

You can share namespace as another directory inside the 2TB partition
itself. Or if you choose to keep namespace separate, then as its XFS, 40GB
should be good enough. I would have recommended more if it was ext3 (as
there default blocksize is 4K, so each inode consumes 4k of disk, where as
its not the case with reiserfs and xfs).


Amar Tumballi
Gluster/GlusterFS Hacker
[bulde on #gluster/irc.gnu.org]
http://www.zresearch.com - Commoditizing Super Storage!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20081125/d3aac990/attachment-0003.html>

More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list