<p>I've also heard it can be slower however I've never done any performance tests on the same hardware with ext3/4 vs XFS since my partitions are so big ext3/4 is just not an option. With that said I've been pleased with the performance I get and am a happy XFS user.</p>
<p>ls</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sep 24, 2011 12:31 PM, "Craig Carl" <<a href="mailto:craig@gestas.net">craig@gestas.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution">> XFS is a valid alternative to ZFS on Linux. If I remember correctly any operation that requires modifying a lot of xattr's can be slower than ext*, have you noticed anything like that? You might see slower rebalances or self healing?<br>
> <br>> Craig<br>> <br>> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse my tpyos.<br>> <br>> On Sep 24, 2011, at 22:14, Liam Slusser <<a href="mailto:lslusser@gmail.com">lslusser@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>>> I have a very large, >500tb, Gluster cluster on Centos Linux but I use the XFS filesystem in a production role. Each xfs filesystem (brick) is around 32tb in size. No problems all runs very well.<br>
>> <br>>> ls<br></div>