Hi All, Thank you for answers. I am not really comparing anything. I have a flat directory with a lot of small files inside. And I have a java application that reads all these files when it starts. If this directory is located on ZFS the application starts fast (15 mins) when the number of files is around 300,000 and starts very slow (more than 24 hours) when the number of files is around 400,000.
The question is why ? Let's set aside the question why this application is designed this way. I still needed to run this application. So, I installed a linux box with XFS, mounted this XFS directory to the Solaris box and moved my flat directory there. Then my application started fast ( < 30 mins) even if the number of files (in the linux operated XFS directory mounted thru NSF to the Solaris box) was 400,000 or more. Basicly, what I want to do is to run this application on a Solaris box. Now I cannot do it. Thanks, Sergey On August 1, 2007 08:15 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On 01/08/2007, at 7:50 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Boyd Adamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Or alternatively, are you comparing ZFS(Fuse) on Linux with XFS on > > >> Linux? That doesn't seem to make sense since the userspace > > >> implementation will always suffer. > > >> > > >> Someone has just mentioned that all of UFS, ZFS and XFS are > > >> available on > > >> FreeBSD. Are you using that platform? That information would be > > >> useful > > >> too. > > > > > > FreeBSD does not use what Solaris calls UFS. > > > > > > Both Solaris and FreeBSD did start with the same filesystem code but > > > Sun did start enhancing UFD in the late 1980's while BSD did not > > > take over > > > the changes. Later BSD started a fork on the filesystemcode. > > > Filesystem > > > performance thus cannot be compared. > > > > I'm aware of that, but they still call it UFS. I'm trying to > > determine what the OP is asking. > > I seem to remember many daemons that used large grouping of files such as > this changing to a split out directory tree starting in the late 80's to > avoid slow stat issues. Is this type of design (tossing 300k+ files into > one flat directory) becoming more acceptable again? > > > -Wade > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
