From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 30 19:43:15 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5253B16A41F for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:43:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from V.Haisman@sh.cvut.cz) Received: from service.sh.cvut.cz (service.sh.cvut.cz [147.32.127.214]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D369C43D48 for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:43:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from V.Haisman@sh.cvut.cz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by service.sh.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27AA1A33EC for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:43:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from service.sh.cvut.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (service [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 22228-10 for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:43:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from logout.sh.cvut.cz (logout.sh.cvut.cz [147.32.127.203]) by service.sh.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 676EE1A33F8 for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:43:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from logout (logout [147.32.127.203]) by logout.sh.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141653C0DD for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:43:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:43:13 +0200 (CEST) From: Vaclav Haisman Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <433C9E44.8000800@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20050930213905.M74024@logout.sh.cvut.cz> References: <433B3F41.8060004@spintech.ro> <433B60EE.4090207@centtech.com> <433C9A64.3030602@spintech.ro> <433C9E44.8000800@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at sh.cvut.cz Subject: Re: journaling fs and large mailbox format X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 19:43:15 -0000 On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Doug Barton wrote: > Alin-Adrian Anton wrote: > >> XFS fits incredibly well with Maildir, however this I did not test >> practically > > I am curious as to what the defaults are for frag, inode, and block sizes on > XFS, and whether that is one of the factors that make it work well with > maildir. > > Doug I don't think that frag, inode and block size is the main factor that makes XFS work well in many small files situations. From what I have read about XFS I gather that it allocates inodes on demand, that it doesn't have fixed amount of them. VH