lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William Bell <billnb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ZFS File System for SOLR 3.6 and SOLR 4
Date Sun, 29 Mar 2015 15:17:55 GMT
How is performance on XFS when compared to ext4?

>From Otis:  noatime, nodiratime

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201306.mbox/%3CCACtzgz1YwM5HDQO1R=2CdGxFmJnXcs4pyWRuaPJkKRc=eB8LsA@mail.gmail.com%3E

Large file systems seem to work well in both. I think the underlying
hardware does actually matter too. SSD vs HDD vs Y.

Several people love XFS at Amazon:
http://java.dzone.com/articles/tips-check-and-improve-your


On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Bill Bell <billnbell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is the an advantage for Xfs over ext4 for Solr ? Anyone done testing?
>
> Bill Bell
> Sent from mobile
>
>
> > On Mar 27, 2015, at 8:14 AM, Shawn Heisey <apache@elyograg.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 3/27/2015 12:30 AM, abhi Abhishek wrote:
> >>         i am trying to use ZFS as filesystem for my Linux Environment.
> are
> >> there any performance implications of using any filesystem other than
> >> ext-3/ext-4 with SOLR?
> >
> > That should work with no problem.
> >
> > The only time Solr tends to have problems is if you try to use a network
> > filesystem.  As long as it's a local filesystem and it implements
> > everything a program can typically expect from a local filesystem, Solr
> > should work perfectly.
> >
> > Because of the compatibility problems that the license for ZFS has with
> > the GPL, ZFS on Linux is probably not as well tested as other
> > filesystems like ext4, xfs, or btrfs, but I have not heard about any big
> > problems, so it's probably safe.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shawn
> >
>



-- 
Bill Bell
billnbell@gmail.com
cell 720-256-8076

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message