I've never had a single issue with my large filesystems either. They've been running for 18 months or so now, and survived power failures, bad disks, and a constant pounding. You are more likely to die from one of your junior admins dd'ing with reckless cluelessness than softupdates.
/dev/twed0s1e 397G 217G 148G 59% /home /dev/twed0s1e 388G 233G 125G 65% /disk /dev/twed0e 148G 36G 100G 27% /disk ----------------------------------------------------------- Barkley C. Vowk -- Systems Analyst -- University of Alberta Math Sciences Department - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: CAB642A, 780-492-4064 Opinions expressed are the responsibility of the author and may not reflect the opinions of others or reality. On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Jason Andresen wrote: > Gary Thorpe wrote: > > > The only logging/journaling file system available for *BSD that I am > > aware of is LFS, which I don't think is either stable or fast. I don't > > know how big a filesystem FFS+softdeps will support, but soft updates > > is not completly stable although I think it can be used with reasonable > > assurance it won't explode (I have). FFS on FreeBSD can support +300GB > > file systems I think, but whether soft updates will work correctly (or > > at least as correctly as it does in smaller file systems) at these > > sizes is unknown to me. > > I've been using softupdates on a 361GB filesystem for some time now. > Although some hardware failures gave vinum fits, softupdates has never > caused me a problem: > /dev/vinum/media 361G 288G 45G 87% /media > > -- > \ |_ _|__ __|_ \ __| Jason Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED] > |\/ | | | / _| Network and Distributed Systems Engineer > _| _|___| _| _|_\___| Office: 703-883-7755 > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
