[lug] Best block size?
zlynx at acm.org
Mon Sep 15 12:23:31 MDT 2003
On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 11:53, Gary Hodges wrote:
> The Matt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 11:09, Gary Hodges wrote:
> > > I've installed a new disk that I will be filling with many thousands of
> > > files with typical sizes of:
> > >
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 hodges hodges 36064 Jul 22 14:39
> > > 20030701185900.jpg
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 hodges hodges 3769 Jul 22 14:39
> > > 20030701185900.png
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 hodges hodges 711 Jul 22 14:39
> > > 20030701185900.properties
> > >
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 hodges hodges 25685 Jul 3 10:33
> > > 20030509054400.jpg
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 hodges hodges 2559 Jul 3 10:33
> > > 20030509054400.png
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 hodges hodges 734 Jul 3 10:33
> > > 20030509054400.properties
> > >
> > >
> > > That is the approximate high and low range of the .jpg files. While
> > > this will be the main use for the disk, I will also create temporary
> > > .iso files to write to CD. What is the ideal block size to use? Why?
> > Well, I can't answer this very well, but I'm wondering what filesystem
> > you are thinking of using? I'd probably recommend ReiserFS if you have
> > many thousands of small files. ReiserFS doesn't really use blocks but
> > trees. It can often be 10x faster than ext3 on small files. On large
> > files (e.g., ISOs) it's usually comparable to ext3 (no big advantage).
> > But, if doesn't work well with NFS or software RAID. So, if that's what
> > you'll be using, ReiserFS won't work.
> I was going to format it ext3. I've never really considered using a
> filesystem other than ext2 or ext3. No plans to NFS or RAID of any
> type. If I use ReiserFS does the whole system have to be that or can I
> just make that one disk ReiserFS?
ReiserFS has been a great filesystem for me. Most of the NFS problems
have been fixed in the newest kernels. I use a 3ware RAID card instead
of software RAID, so I don't know anything about that.
It's just fine to make one disk use ReiserFS. You can mix and match
filesystems all you like. The only drawback is having your kernel using
more memory because of the added filesystem modules. It's nothing big,
though. Maybe a couple hundred K bytes.
Zan Lynx <zlynx at acm.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the LUG