<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Glen Dragon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gdragon@jetcom.org">gdragon@jetcom.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:08 PM, belcampo <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:belcampo@zonnet.nl" target="_blank">belcampo@zonnet.nl</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
> Is EXT4 finally to the place, from a performance standpoint, for MythTV<br><div>
> that it's usable? EXT3's handling of large directory listings, and large<br>
> file create/delete before the MythTV"slow delete" feature made it unusable.<br>
</div> From a short test, ext4 still is considerable slower on that as XFS. I<br>
use xfs on software-raid which didn't ever give me troubles.<br>
<div><div></div><div>><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>I've been running XFS on SW raid5 since 2005. No problems here. Latest video array is 6 TB.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br>I've had XFS on software raid5 and raid6 for several years as well, the largest is 8TB but it's a new array, the 6TB one before that has several years on it. Never any problems with the file system.<br>
<br></div><div>-- <br></div></div>Fedor G Pikus (<a href="mailto:fpikus@gmail.com">fpikus@gmail.com</a>)<br><a href="http://www.pikus.net">http://www.pikus.net</a><br><a href="http://wild-light.com">http://wild-light.com</a><br>