[Linux-cluster] which is better gfs2 and ocfs2?

yue ooolinux at 163.com
Sun Mar 13 13:37:37 UTC 2011

1.i need gfs2 or ocfs2 to store xen-disk image file(20G--100G),it is big file. the underlying storage  is fc-san.   both of them have  cluster sence.so they fit for me.
if gfs2 is ready for product?  anyone use gfs2 in product?  stability is the most important thing.
2.i have try gfs2 and ocfs2 , iozone shows , gfs2 has a good throughput when record>=512k  and file size > 4G.   
3.my kernel is 2.6.32 and latest.

At 2011-03-13 12:48:17,"Alan Brown" <ajb2 at mssl.ucl.ac.uk> wrote:

>On 12/03/11 23:13, Bob Peterson wrote:
>> Agreed.  We're abundantly aware of the performance problems,
>> and we're not ignoring them.
>I know Bob, thanks.
>> (1) We recently found and fixed a problem that caused the
>>      dlm to pass locking traffic much slower than possible.
>Is this rolled into 2.6.18-238.5.1.el5 ?
>> (2) We recently increased the speed and accuracy of fsck.gfs2
>>      quite a bit.
>Noted and appreciated. I had cause to use them a few days ago.
>> (3) We also recently developed a patch that improves GFS2's
>>      management of cluster locks by making hold times self-tuning.
>>      This makes gfs2 perform much faster in many situations.
>> (4) We've recently developed another performance patch that
>>      sped up clustered deletes (unlinks) as much as 25%.
>Good. This has been a real cow but at least for this kind of thing users 
>simply tend to go for lunch and let it run.
>> (5) We recently identified and fixed a performance problem
>>      related to writing large files that sped things up considerably.
>  See question 1 :)
>Can I get hotfixes if possible? (el5.6 x64)
>Linux-cluster mailing list
>Linux-cluster at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20110313/f16a7947/attachment.htm>

More information about the Linux-cluster mailing list