Over at Enterprise Storage Forum, Henry Newman and Jeff Layton started a conversation that needs to be shared. This is a very good article.
In it, they reproduced a table comparing file systems coming from this page at Redhat. This is really showing a comparison of what the “limits” are in a theoretical or practical sense between the various versions of RHEL platforms. The file system table compares what you can do in each version.
This said, the table gets some things wrong. This isn’t a criticism of Henry and Jeff, this is a criticism of the table. We know its wrong, unless Redhat purposefully limited the xfs code. Which is not likely.
Remember, Redhat had to be dragged kicking and screaming into supporting xfs, by its customer base who were using it. This support is … well … similar to the concept of damning with faint praise. Its support in a passive aggressive manner.
The RHEL table claims that the maximum size of an xfs file and/or file system is 100TB. It further claims that GFS is effectively much better than this.
Ok, I won’t fisk the GFS claim. I will fisk the xfs claim. Limits for xfs can be found here, at the source. Quoting them
Partner wants a 4 way bond on their unit. No problem. [root@jr4-1 ~]# /opt/scalable/sbin/mkchbond.pl –bond=bond0 –eth=eth0,eth1,eth2,eth3 –ip=10.100.243.80 –netmask=255.255.0.0 –mode=0 –write mkchbond.pl: v0.9 Create channel bonds easily by Joe Landman (http://scalableinformatics.com) This software is Copyright (c) 2005-2007 by Scalable Informatics and licensed under GPL v2.0 only. You may freely distribute this software under the terms and … Read moreHow to channel bond in Linux