EXT4/LVM recommendations for 3TB of mdbox ?
Hello,
Do you have recommendations on EXT4 and LVM options for a 3TB file-system for mdbox?
We currently use the mbox format on a XFS with poor performances since the update in v2.1 (Debian).
We will switch to EXT4 to have the possibility of shrinking the file-system if needed (which is not possible with XFS), we currently have LVM partitions but with mdbox we will use LVM snapshots to backup the server in a consistent state.
So,
any particular options to use with mkfs.ext4 for the creation of the FS ?
do you recommend a «thin» logical volume ? Our storage (IBM Storwize v7000) already have thin provisioning capabilities.
The server will be a VMware virtual machine running Debian with RDM LUNs of 500GB. Data blocks will be automatically spread across several RAID disk (SSD, SAS, SATA) by the v7000. The «mdbox_rotate_size» will be configured around 10MB.
Thanks,
Nicolas C.
On 2015-06-24 13:03, Nicolas C. wrote:
Hello,
Do you have recommendations on EXT4 and LVM options for a 3TB file-system for mdbox?
We currently use the mbox format on a XFS with poor performances since the update in v2.1 (Debian).
What qualifies as "poor performance"? How many users?
We will switch to EXT4 to have the possibility of shrinking the file-system if needed (which is not possible with XFS), we currently have LVM partitions but with mdbox we will use LVM snapshots to backup the server in a consistent state.
So,
- any particular options to use with mkfs.ext4 for the creation of the FS ?
It's not what you asked - but the options for XFS creation and mounting can make a fair bit of difference.
- do you recommend a «thin» logical volume ? Our storage (IBM Storwize v7000) already have thin provisioning capabilities.
The server will be a VMware virtual machine running Debian with RDM LUNs of 500GB. Data blocks will be automatically spread across several RAID disk (SSD, SAS, SATA) by the v7000. The «mdbox_rotate_size» will be configured around 10MB.
I happen to be using 32MB.
Just going to mdbox can make a measurable performance increase. I also make use of single-instance-storage.
Everyone is going to have their own opinions and experiences with filesystems. I personally have had mixed issues with EXT3/4 but have enjoyed great success with XFS. Admittedly my server is probably much smaller than others but I still need to depend on it.
-- Daniel
Le 24/06/2015 22:35, dmiller@amfes.com a écrit :
On 2015-06-24 13:03, Nicolas C. wrote:
Hello,
Do you have recommendations on EXT4 and LVM options for a 3TB file-system for mdbox?
We currently use the mbox format on a XFS with poor performances since the update in v2.1 (Debian).
What qualifies as "poor performance"?
Way more i/o for the exact same conditions.
We kept dovecot in version 1.2 on Wheezy (with pinning) and it was running fine but as soon as we installed the official Wheezy version of Dovecot (2.1) the iowait increased on the server.
How many users?
"doveadm who -1" reports an average of 4.000 connections during business hours with peaks going up to 6.000.
We will switch to EXT4 to have the possibility of shrinking the file-system if needed (which is not possible with XFS), we currently have LVM partitions but with mdbox we will use LVM snapshots to backup the server in a consistent state.
So,
- any particular options to use with mkfs.ext4 for the creation of the FS ? It's not what you asked - but the options for XFS creation and mounting can make a fair bit of difference.
Yes, I saw the "XFS vs EXT4 for mail storage" thread (2013) and I was wondering if, since then, people had a feedback on EXT4.
- do you recommend a «thin» logical volume ? Our storage (IBM Storwize v7000) already have thin provisioning capabilities.
The server will be a VMware virtual machine running Debian with RDM LUNs of 500GB. Data blocks will be automatically spread across several RAID disk (SSD, SAS, SATA) by the v7000. The «mdbox_rotate_size» will be configured around 10MB. I happen to be using 32MB.
Just going to mdbox can make a measurable performance increase. I also make use of single-instance-storage.
We know that mdbox will be helping, we are very eager to get rid of the old mdbox format!
Everyone is going to have their own opinions and experiences with filesystems. I personally have had mixed issues with EXT3/4 but have enjoyed great success with XFS. Admittedly my server is probably much smaller than others but I still need to depend on it.
participants (3)
-
dmiller＠amfes.com
-
Nicolas C
-
Nicolas C.