I have such a file system which is not yet actively used. Its main purpose is storing ~30GiB images. Nothing else. I did a couple of small tests on it (storing large ISO files) and throughput was actually surprisingly good. I'd assume that putting a lot of small files on this FS yield very bad performance though. Your question makes me wonder if I shouldn't just recreate this filesystem the as per best practices anyway. If you want, I can do some quick tests on it since it's not in use anyway. Wannes ________________________________ From: Eugen Block <ceph-users@ceph.io> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2026 08:37 To: ceph-users@ceph.io <ceph-users@ceph.io> Subject: [ceph-users] CephFS erasure-coded default data pool Hi, just out of curiosity, has anyone been CephFS that way? I know it's discouraged in the docs (and we haven't tried it otherwise) but since you can still create a CephFS with the --force flag, I was wondering if there's some long-term experience ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Hi, just out of curiosity, has anyone been CephFS that way? I know it's discouraged in the docs (and we haven't tried it otherwise) but since you can still create a CephFS with the --force flag, I was wondering if there's some long-term experience available in the community. Thanks Eugen _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io