Re: JFS2 - Part Deux
- From: Jeff Barratt-McCartney <jbarratt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 10:00:45 -0500
i dont normally use inline logs, as they dont afford you the opportunity to modify disk placement of logs for performance
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM AIX Discussion List on behalf of Mark Schlechte
Sent: Wed 1/31/2007 9:44 AM
To: aix-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: JFS2 - Part Deux
With the discussion about jfs2 I decided it was a good time to post my question about Inline logs and jfs2.
We still run 4.3.3 systems but I do have a couple of 5.2 servers so when I have the opportunity I've done a little bit of work with JFS2.
When I created some file systems recently I went with jfs2 and chose inline log, mostly because I didn't have a separate disk to use for that purpose.
Good? Bad? Depends on the workload characteristics?
I noticed Ku had mentioned Inline worked for him.
mark
<html><body><font face = "arial" size = "1">
DISCLAIMER: The information transmitted is intended only
for the addressee and may contain confidential,
proprietary and/or privileged material. Any
unauthorized review, distribution or other use
of or the taking of any action in reliance upon
this information is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and
delete or destroy this message and any copies.
</font><body></html>
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: JFS2 - Part Deux
- From: Enrique Sanchez Vela
- Re: JFS2 - Part Deux
- References:
- JFS2 - Part Deux
- From: Mark Schlechte
- JFS2 - Part Deux
- Prev by Date: JFS2 - Part Deux
- Next by Date: Re: JFS2 - Part Deux
- Previous by thread: JFS2 - Part Deux
- Next by thread: Re: JFS2 - Part Deux
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|