[Gluster-users] ZFS + Linux + Glusterfs for a production ready 100+ TB NAS on cloud

[Liam Slusser]

I've also heard it can be slower however I've never done any performance
tests on the same hardware with ext3/4 vs XFS since my partitions are so big
ext3/4 is just not an option.  With that said I've been pleased with the
performance I get and am a happy XFS user.

ls
On Sep 24, 2011 12:31 PM, "Craig Carl" <craig at gestas.net> wrote:
> XFS is a valid alternative to ZFS on Linux. If I remember correctly any
operation that requires modifying a lot of xattr's can be slower than ext*,
have you noticed anything like that? You might see slower rebalances or self
healing?
>
> Craig
>
> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse my tpyos.
>
> On Sep 24, 2011, at 22:14, Liam Slusser <lslusser at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a very large, >500tb, Gluster cluster on Centos Linux but I use
the XFS filesystem in a production role. Each xfs filesystem (brick) is
around 32tb in size. No problems all runs very well.
>>
>> ls
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://supercolony.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20110924/58bc4275/attachment.html>