From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 1 07:30:41 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 71DB216A469 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 07:30:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kometen@gmail.com) Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328E713C44C for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 07:30:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kometen@gmail.com) Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i29so490492wxd for ; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 00:30:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jZhn+2Ur4mB59YBAHkfL5f8HKxOASlxSyStKmSQ5KiX+uSDPYYIGy9iVSrWkpiu1vkPupn41zUvBriLE6802wCCN0XhznFXl5KfjGNSmyWz/Ux0mfTneutL9eIA0NnA5/scqE7C7oq4rUAUwhMrVc08u8DmuY0vcETUQkdndn1Y= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UTL/DYtojSkzXyAprwsybg+S8RyWv2yxWlsMI30SBw9J0DpOdOjDm72YgYh3+T0+VP2V5SMHSNRLoUx4xXjLVqUDegaSJ4dPHr6+bNP4ra6u3uomV44eFQQYesT1XWi1Fy71EI/nk0+HlDz36ra0e15Zvfb1lCSoPhicOUca7L8= Received: by 10.70.52.1 with SMTP id z1mr367744wxz.1183275039984; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 00:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.72.6 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Jul 2007 00:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 09:30:39 +0200 From: "Claus Guttesen" To: "Nguyen Tam Chinh" In-Reply-To: <64b284310706270311j2a6af2f6i6766b483a4b66a5c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <64b284310706270311j2a6af2f6i6766b483a4b66a5c@mail.gmail.com> Cc: 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 07:30:41 -0000 > We're going to build a server with some 1Tb of over 500 million small > files with size from 0,5k to 4k. I'm wonder if the ufs2 can handle > this kind of system well. From newfs(8) the min block size is 4k. This > is not optimal in our case, a 1k or 0,5k block is more effective IMHO. > I'd be happy if anyone can suggest what does fragment (block/8) in the > ufs2 mean and how this parameter works. I know It's better to read the > full ufs2 specification, but hope that someone here can give a hint. > Please advice with optimizations or tricks. > Thank you very much. Try zfs on amd64 unless your app doesn't work well with zfs or your organization doesn't allow current. Current is remarkably stable taking into account zfs is fairly new and ported from solaris and running on current. I'm using it on a 8.2 TB nexsan storage and no crashes during testing and a limited time in production. Some years ago I used FreeBSD (5.2) as nfs-server (using ufs2) on approx. 15 partitions ranging from 400 GB to 2 TB in size. If the server for some reason had crashed the webservers were unable to access the nfs-mounted partitions during the period the server did a snapshot of a partition, in order to perform a background-fsck and thus our website was down. So ufs2 does not scale well. -- regards Claus When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, the gentlest gamester is the soonest winner. Shakespeare