[Samba] suggestions for a "fast" fileserver - 1G / 10G

Christopher Chan christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk
Tue Mar 25 08:40:30 MDT 2014

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:55 PM, Linda W wrote:
> Someone mentioned Redhat is going with XFS for their servers -- so is
> Novell/Suse.  If you need more reliability on XFS, you can get it by
> reducing the caching and writeback delays -- until you have it down to
> the performance of ext3/4.  But if you have a reliable system and power
> (UPS), XFS is well worth the trade off.  But if you have heavy I/O
> inflight all the time as with a heavily used MTA, it might be better to
> go solid-state anyway, not to mention MTA's aren't XFS's forte -- it was
> build to support heavy I/O of uncompressed video and sound recording and
> production -- it was build for speed for large files (large back then,
> when it was  initially designed, in the early 1990's, was in the MB-GB
> range)... mail messages.. are generally smaller and wouldn't benefit
> nearly as much as other loads...

The best thing to do is to profile and then simulate workloads on the 
various filesystems to see which works best or meets the requirements.

More information about the samba mailing list