From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 1 18:29:41 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B69E416A469; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:29:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (chylonia.3miasto.net [83.12.228.78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D44613C4BF; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 18:29:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l61ITV1c064256; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:29:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id l61ITVfJ064253; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:29:31 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:29:31 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Peter Jeremy In-Reply-To: <20070630235127.GX15680@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20070701202758.B64116@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <64b284310706270311j2a6af2f6i6766b483a4b66a5c@mail.gmail.com> <20070630235127.GX15680@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Nguyen Tam Chinh , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-Questions Subject: Re: UFS2 optimization for many small files X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 18:29:41 -0000 > I have tried using a 4K/0.5K UFS1 filesystem in the past and found the > performance was very poor. UFS2 was based on 16K/2K and I would expect > it to perform even worse with 4K/0.5K. I would suggest you try 8K/1K. > not for small files. you are light with large files but it's not THAT bad as you say. i reagularly use 4K/0.5 UFS but not for everything if i require good fast speed for big files. for really big files i make 32/4 filesystem with very little inodes