[OpenAFS] Cache partition choice still limited to ext2 on Linux?

Dirk Heinrichs dirk.heinrichs@altum.de
Wed, 07 Nov 2012 11:49:03 +0100

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Am Mittwoch 07 November 2012, 11:38:07 schrieb Lars Schimmer:

> On 2012-11-07 11:09, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > if I remember right, somebody wrote a few weeks ago, that with
> > 1.6.x the choices for the cache partition on Linux systems aren't
> > limited to ext2 only anymore. Is this correct?
> Correct.
> > If yes, which filesystems are possible to use (which ones are not)?
> > Does the cache even need its own partition nowadays?
> Usual all FS are possible, some are useless (NFS e.g.). Would be
> interesting to see the cache on OpenAFS itself^^

Didn't think of any network fs at all.

> It still needs a partition, but you can loopmount a file for it. Or
> use memcache.

Last time I used memcache, I had issues with Java applications (Eclipse, 
SQLDeveloper). They brought the system to high load until they were finally 
OOM-killed when run under KDE on a machine with 4G RAM (512M or 1G of which 
set apart for the memcache).

> I still would go with ext2 or ext3. But maybe some other fs is a bit
> faster, never tested.

Thanks a lot. The idea was to setup a btrfs-only VM for testing purposes, and 
use a subvolume for the cache. Not sure about the loop-mount method in this 
case, since you also can't put swapfiles on btrfs.


Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinrichs@altum.de>
Tel: +49 (0)2471 209385 | Mobil: +49 (0)176 34473913
GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Jabber: dirk.heinrichs@altum.de

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)