[gpfsug-discuss] GPFS, LTFS/EE and data-in-inode?

valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu
Mon Jul 24 16:49:07 BST 2017


On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 12:43:10 +0100, Jonathan Buzzard said:

> For an archive service how about only accepting files in actual
> "archive" formats and then severely restricting the number of files a
> user can have?
>
> By archive files I am thinking like a .zip, tar.gz, tar.bz or similar.

After having dealt with users who fill up disk storage for almost 4 decades
now, I'm fully aware of those advantages. :)

( /me ponders when an IBM 2314 disk pack with 27M of space was "a lot" in 1978,
and when we moved 2 IBM mainframes in 1989, 400G took 2,500+ square feet, and
now 8T drives are all over the place...)

On the flip side, my current project is migrating 5 petabytes of data from our
old archive system that didn't have such rules (mostly due to politics and the
fact that the underlying XFS filesystem uses a 4K blocksize so it wasn't as big
an issue), so I'm stuck with what people put in there years ago.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 486 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20170724/bfe585c4/attachment.sig>


More information about the gpfsug-discuss mailing list