#osd mkfs options {fs-type} = {mkfs options} # default for xfs is "-f"
#osd mount options {fs-type} = {mount options} # default mount option is "rw,noatime"
- # For example, for ext4, the mount option might look like this:
+ # For example, for xfs, the mount option might look like this:
- #osd mkfs options ext4 = user_xattr,rw,noatime
+ #osd mkfs options xfs = inode64,rw,noatime
# Execute $ hostname to retrieve the name of your host,
# and replace {hostname} with the name of your host.
multiple daemons against a single drive can slow performance considerably. There
are also file system limitations to consider: btrfs is not quite stable enough
for production, but it has the ability to journal and write data simultaneously,
-whereas XFS and ext4 do not.
+whereas XFS does not.
.. important:: Since Ceph has to write all data to the journal before it can
- send an ACK (for XFS and EXT4 at least), having the journal and OSD
+ send an ACK (for XFS at least), having the journal and OSD
performance in balance is really important!
journal and object data on the same drive, but this may increase the time it
takes to journal a write and ACK to the client. Ceph must write to the journal
before it can ACK the write. The btrfs filesystem can write journal data and
-object data simultaneously, whereas XFS and ext4 cannot.
+object data simultaneously, whereas XFS cannot.
Ceph best practices dictate that you should run operating systems, OSD data and
OSD journals on separate drives.