News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Things We Forgot to Monitor. Parent comment

Re:Things We Forgot to Monitor by caw on Monday February 10, 2014 @03:11PM (#7213440)
Similar to free inodes, you should also check for maximum number of directories. dir_index option helps, but I've seen it become a problem.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Things We Forgot to Monitor by mnw21cam on Monday February 10, 2014 @03:27PM (#7213557)
There's a maximum number of directories? On what filesystem is that?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Things We Forgot to Monitor by caw on Monday February 10, 2014 @03:33PM (#7213612)
ext3 without dir_index has a limit of 32K directories in any one directory.

Where I saw it crop up was 32K folders under /tmp on a cluster system. So no it's not a limit on number of directories entirely (that's inodes), but rather how many subdirectories you can have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4#Features <-- Fixes 32K limit

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Things We Forgot to Monitor by otterley on Monday February 10, 2014 @03:39PM (#7213649)
ext3/4 has really poor large-directory performance, even with dir_index, especially if you are constantly removing and readding nodes. I would highly recommend XFS for large-directory use cases.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Things We Forgot to Monitor by 0x0 on Monday February 10, 2014 @07:17PM (#7214759)
I got bit by this once, i think it was related to a maximum of 32k hardlinks per inode, which effectively sets a limit of 32k subdirs since each subdir has a hardlink to ".."
[ Parent | on HN ]