[OpenAFS] Re: Problems with reiserfs when start OpenAFS 1.2.11-fc1 Segmentation fault with kernel 2.4.22-1.2174.nptl

[Derrick J Brashear]

Removed 50 gazillion things including the reiserfs list from the CCs on
this; They don't have persistent inode numbers, and they feel they don't
need them, most applications don't care, the afs cache does, and that's
fine. There's no need to involve them. I don't know who added them, and
I'm not pointing fingers. I just figured I'd tell you the why.

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Ryan Underwood wrote:

> > >EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on loop(7,0), internal journal
> > >EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
> >
> > No, if you're going to be stacking filesystems, use ext2, not ext3.  You
> > will get better performance, and there's no use in having two levels of
> > journaling in this case.
>
> You might also think about bigger than 100MB cache file.  A big cache
> helps out AFS client performance tremendously.  But definitely use ext2
> and not ext3 as others have said.

Indeed, and yes, if you're going to make any decent amount of client use,
seriously consider devoting more than 100mb to the cache. You'll be
happier with performance if you're not turning it over as often; If you
make it too small you're throwing away one benefit of AFS.