2009/3/18 Pedro M. S. Oliveira :
> From what I've seen on the list there are some people using XFS, Ext3, and
> so on. What's your experience with the different file systems?
> What FS do you guys use recommend/used and why?
We use XFS on a 3-disk raid 5 (3x500gb).
Just because we're used to usin
Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote:
>
> Backuppc will use all the processor, ram, and disk speed you give it. I've
> not had a box where they weren't all pegged. I tend to limit concurrent
> backups to 2; maybe 3 or 4 on a really high-end box (multiple processors and
> a proven fast disk array); to con
On 03/19 11:56 , Pedro M. S. Oliveira wrote:
> With the amount of data I reported and number of files I just have 6% of
> inodes occupied so I don't think that is really a problem, do you use XFS
> for any special purpose besides dynamic inode creation?
The ability to be resized while mounted is
With the amount of data I reported and number of files I just have 6% of inodes
occupied so I don't think that is really a problem, do you use XFS for any
special purpose besides dynamic inode creation? What do you think about
recovery and maintenance tools for XFS. And least but not lest don't
On 03/18 05:48 , Pedro M. S. Oliveira wrote:
> What FS do you guys use recommend/used and why?
I typically use XFS for backuppc data pools, and ext3 for the root
filesystem. I don't want to run out of inodes like ext3 can do. :)
--
Carl Soderstrom
Systems Administrator
Real-Time Enterprises
www.
Hi all!
I'm running backuppc in several installations and sites and i'm very pleased
with it, one of the sites has more than 3TB compressed data and about 6.000.000
files. Backupps run very well fast and reliable. My question is about FS
performance.
From what I've seen on the list there are so
