Hi,

I used ext3 for the first storage attached to the server, but I switched to 
ext4 for the second
storage purchase.  Both file systems work fine, but the documentation for ext4 
say it is designed
to support large files better than ext3.  Scratch volumes delete much faster 
from the ext4 filesystems.

The TSM databases are also on ext4.


Regards,

Bill Colwell
Draper Lab

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of 
Stefán Þór Hreinsson
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 8:26 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Filesystem preferences for tsm 6 pools

I've been running on EXT3 for now 5 years, one year on 6.1 and 6.2 on several 
servers, it's solid, no complaints.  Performance has always been enough, from 
where I'm standing you go with the most commonly used solid filesystem in 
Linux, for me that's EXT3.

regards
stefan thor hreinsson
basis
________________________________________
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] on behalf of Lee, 
Gary D. [GLEE AT BSU DOT EDU]
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 14:01
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Filesystem preferences for tsm 6 pools

Setting up a tsm 6.2.2 server under redhat enterprise linux 6 on the intel 
platform.

Wondering what was the group's opinion on which type of file system to use for 
storage pools?
Since raw devices are not supported, I am looking to maximize space and 
performance as much as possible.



Gary Lee
Senior System Programmer
Ball State University
phone: 765-285-1310