On 12/23/2010 9:08 AM, Ross Walker wrote:
> On Dec 23, 2010, at 2:12 AM, cpol...@surewest.net wrote:
>
>> Matt wrote:
>>> Is ext4 stable on CentOS 5.5 64bit? I have an email server with a
>>> great deal of disk i/o and was wandering if ext4 would be better then
>>> ext3 for it?
>>
>> Before committing to ext4 on a production server, it
>> would be good to consider the comments made in
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/317781/comments/45
>> which presumably still apply to current CentOS 5.5 64-bit kernels.
>> As I read it, Ts'o argues that the apparent loss of stability
>> compared to ext3 is a design issue in the realm of applications
>> that run atop it. I hope this is not a misreading.
>
> Waiting for applications to be properly written, ie use fsync(), is no way to
> pick a file system. You'd have the same problems on xfs or any other file
> system that does delayed writes.
But note that the reason applications don't use fsync() when they should
is probably due to linux historically not implementing it in a
reasonable way (i.e. it would flush the entire filesystem buffer and
wait for completion instead of just the requested file's outstanding
blocks). Not sure when/if that was fixed - but it is also probably
behind the old impressions that mysql is faster than postgresql.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
