<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Gordan Bobic <<a href="mailto:gordan@bobich.net">gordan@bobich.net</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Sounds like you are running into the same bug that I ran into with GFS2 on a similar setup nearly 2 years ago, except I could produce a lock-up in under 2 seconds every time. Solution is to use GFS1 if you really want to stick with that setup, but bear in mind that, regardless of the cluster file system (GFS1, GFS2, OCFS2) the performance will scale _inversely_. Cluster file systems really don't work well with millions of small files. </blockquote></div> Hi Gordan, thanks for answer. But, if it is "possible" to be solved (as it was with GFS1) why is it not feasible to GFS2? Well, no problem at al to migrate to GFS1, actually I've already thinked about it, but all those gfs1 tunning options and tests makes me a bit apprehensive. I'll wait a bit more for GFS2 community, if they say that it can't be done I go to GFS1 or even ocfs2 (what is the third option, as I've already a RHCS structure with clvmd). -- Flávio do Carmo Júnior aka waKKu