In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Matt Dillon writes: : : -b 16384 -f 4096 -c 159 : I think Bruce swears by 4K (page-sized) fragments. Not a bad : way to go. I use 2K because I (and others) put in so much hard work : to fix all the little niggling bugs in the VM system related to partial : page validation and, damn it, I intend to use those features! At the other end of the spectrum, 32M [sic] and 64M [sic] disks work well with -b 4096 -f 512 -c 10 But I tend to do what phk has done with the large -c flags on my insanely-sized, rediculously-cheap XXG IDE drives. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Alfred Perlstein
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Matt Dillon
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Jordan Hubbard
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Alfred Perlstein
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Alfred Perlstein
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Matt Dillon
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Warner Losh
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Matt Dillon
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Dan Nelson
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Darren Pilgrim
- RE: Optimal UFS parameters Matt Simerson
- Re: RE: Optimal UFS parameters Matt Dillon
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Christian Weisgerber
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters 207 . 100
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Christoph Sold
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Josef Karthauser
- Re: Optimal UFS parameters Matt Dillon