Re: Large File Systems - Enough inodes?
On 21/05/14 09:22, theartloy wrote: > Just a data point, this behaviour has changed; > > wheezy's mke2fs(8) has this: >> > Be warned that it is not possible to expand the number of inodes >> > on a filesystem after it is created, so be careful deciding the >> > correct value for this parameter. > Whereas jessie's mke2fs(8) has this: >> > Note that resizing a filesystem changes the numer of inodes to >> > maintain this ratio. Interesting, thanks. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/537bfa1e.2000...@walnut.gen.nz
Re: Large File Systems - Enough inodes?
On 5/20/2014 12:00 PM, Richard Hector wrote: > On 21/05/14 04:24, Sven Hartge wrote: ... > I like to create filesystems relatively small, on LVM, so that any of > them can be grown later, when I find out where the space is needed. But > extending an ext(2|3|4) filesystem doesn't create new inodes, so the > ratio of inodes to space drops, and eventually this is a problem. > >> And if you really want to be on the safe side: use XFS. > > And that's my solution. The reason for this is two fold. First, xfs gives you plenty of inodes to begin with, and xfs_growfs adds more inodes as well as additional free space when you grow an LV. Example using mkfs.xfs defaults: FilesystemTypeSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda6 xfs 94G 6.4G 87G 7% /home FilesystemTypeInodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on /dev/sda6 xfs 94M7.1K 94M1% /home 1 million inodes per gigabyte. Cheers, Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/537bcf91.7050...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Large File Systems - Enough inodes?
On 20/05/14 18:00, Richard Hector wrote: > I like to create filesystems relatively small, on LVM, so that any of > them can be grown later, when I find out where the space is needed. But > extending an ext(2|3|4) filesystem doesn't create new inodes, so the > ratio of inodes to space drops, and eventually this is a problem. Just a data point, this behaviour has changed; wheezy's mke2fs(8) has this: > Be warned that it is not possible to expand the number of inodes > on a filesystem after it is created, so be careful deciding the > correct value for this parameter. Whereas jessie's mke2fs(8) has this: > Note that resizing a filesystem changes the numer of inodes to > maintain this ratio. After a bit of searching, I found this patch applied to e2fsprog: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4/40554 I am not sure when the behaviour of resize2fs changed, but the patch submitter said "The man page still said it was not possible to change the number of inodes on a filesystem after creating it." suggesting that there had been some time between the code and doc change. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/537bc78f.3060...@zoho.com
Re: Large File Systems - Enough inodes?
On 21/05/14 04:24, Sven Hartge wrote: > Kenneth Jacker wrote: > >> I am buying two new SATA hard drives: 1TB and 2TB. > >> I'd like to use the 2TB unit for backups (typical Linux directories >> and files) ... with just a single file system (ext4 most likely). > >> Will 'mkfs' create "enough" inodes? Or, would it be better to, say, >> split the 2TB into four 500GB file systems. Or, some other approach? > > I have in my 15 years as Linux admin only run out if inodes in two > cases: > > a) INN2 usenet server with traditional spool which contained a metric > sh*t ton of very very small files. Needed to recreate the filesystem > with a bytes-per-inode size of 1024. > > b) squid2 spool directory. Also a motherlode of very small files. > > In all other cases the defaults of mke2fs were sane and no need for > further tuning was needed. Just look at the inode/byte ratio of the > filesystems you want to backup. Your destination will show the same > ratio. There's another way I've run out; it may mean I've been doing the wrong thing. I like to create filesystems relatively small, on LVM, so that any of them can be grown later, when I find out where the space is needed. But extending an ext(2|3|4) filesystem doesn't create new inodes, so the ratio of inodes to space drops, and eventually this is a problem. > And if you really want to be on the safe side: use XFS. And that's my solution. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/537b8a46.3000...@walnut.gen.nz
Re: Large File Systems - Enough inodes?
Kenneth Jacker wrote: > I am buying two new SATA hard drives: 1TB and 2TB. > I'd like to use the 2TB unit for backups (typical Linux directories > and files) ... with just a single file system (ext4 most likely). > Will 'mkfs' create "enough" inodes? Or, would it be better to, say, > split the 2TB into four 500GB file systems. Or, some other approach? I have in my 15 years as Linux admin only run out if inodes in two cases: a) INN2 usenet server with traditional spool which contained a metric sh*t ton of very very small files. Needed to recreate the filesystem with a bytes-per-inode size of 1024. b) squid2 spool directory. Also a motherlode of very small files. In all other cases the defaults of mke2fs were sane and no need for further tuning was needed. Just look at the inode/byte ratio of the filesystems you want to backup. Your destination will show the same ratio. And if you really want to be on the safe side: use XFS. Grüße, Sven. -- Sigmentation fault. Core dumped. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/7amik4iat...@mids.svenhartge.de
Large File Systems - Enough inodes?
I am buying two new SATA hard drives: 1TB and 2TB. I'd like to use the 2TB unit for backups (typical Linux directories and files) ... with just a single file system (ext4 most likely). Will 'mkfs' create "enough" inodes? Or, would it be better to, say, split the 2TB into four 500GB file systems. Or, some other approach? Thanks for your ideas! -- Prof Kenneth H Jacker k...@cs.appstate.edu Computer Science Dept www.cs.appstate.edu/~khj Appalachian State Univ Boone, NC 28608 USA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/8761l0e9rz@be.cs.appstate.edu
