> :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 r
:On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 05:53:18AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
:>
:> How frequently do people fsck?
:
:Once per reboot usually.
:
:Joe
:--
:Josef Karthauser [[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
No, that's an fsck -p ... if the filesystem is clean, it doesn't
do anything.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> How frequently do people fsck?
Well, that depends on whether I'm attached atm or not.
Oh, you mean filesystems? :-)
--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The bronze landed last, w
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 05:53:18AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> How frequently do people fsck?
Once per reboot usually.
Joe
--
Josef Karthauser[[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
. FreeBSD: The power to change the world
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL P
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
>
> How frequently do people fsck?
Only at boot time, or when problems surface.
Just my $.02
-Christoph Sold
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
How frequently do people fsck?
-- TJ
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
This is a interesting topic (to me, anyway), and is one of the things that
often gets overlooked by those of us with less experience. Rather than
getting into a long discussion about modifying the newfs defaults across
the board, what if the newfs options used were based on the size of
the FS? T
In the last episode (Dec 07), Matt Dillon said:
> Well, too-large a C/G will result in greater file fragmentation,
> because FFS can't manage the file layouts in the cylinder groups as
> well. The default of 16 is definitely too little. 100+ is probably
> too much. Something in the middle will
:
: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 relate
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 pa
Matt Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The default filesystem parameters are:
>
> newfs -f 1024 -b 8192 -i 8192 -c 16 ...
-i 4096
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTE
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>> So far I don't see any indication here (or elsewhere) that anybody
>> has that grasp.
>>
>> I guess that is really a testimony to FFS/UFS's qualites...
>>
>> The main thing is that you significantly reduce your fsck time if
>> you redu
* Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 00:52] wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>
> >I'd do it, but I don't really have a grasp on the optimal parameters
> >to set based on FS size.
>
> So far I don't see any indication here (or elsewhere) that anybody
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>I'd do it, but I don't really have a grasp on the optimal parameters
>to set based on FS size.
So far I don't see any indication here (or elsewhere) that anybody
has that grasp.
I guess that is really a testimony to FFS/UFS's qualites...
> It would be nice to up the default cylinders/group in sysinstall
> for larger partitions (anything over 8GB). I wouldn't up it to
> 159 as a default, but 32 would be a whole lot better then the
Well, if somebody wants to figure out the best defaults, they're
easily set in sysinstal
* Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 00:25] wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>
> >> Right now I tend to use:
> >>
> >>-b 16384 -f 4096 -c 159
> >
> >I know you're pretty busy, but any chance of getting this into
> >sysinstall? Maybe hindged on the
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>> Right now I tend to use:
>>
>> -b 16384 -f 4096 -c 159
>
>I know you're pretty busy, but any chance of getting this into
>sysinstall? Maybe hindged on the size of the partition?
sysinstall supports you changing the args to newfs,
:In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, A G F Keahan writes:
:>What parameters should I choose for a large (say, 60 or 80Gb)
:>filesystem? I remember a while ago someone (phk?) conducted a survey,
:>but nothing seems to have come of it. In the meantime, the capacity of
:>an average hard drive has inc
:>
:> Right now I tend to use:
:>
:> -b 16384 -f 4096 -c 159
:
:I know you're pretty busy, but any chance of getting this into
:sysinstall? Maybe hindged on the size of the partition?
:
:--
:-Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
:"I have the heart of a child; I keep i
* Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 00:12] wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, A G F Keahan writes:
> >What parameters should I choose for a large (say, 60 or 80Gb)
> >filesystem? I remember a while ago someone (phk?) conducted a survey,
> >but nothing seems to have come of it.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, A G F Keahan writes:
>What parameters should I choose for a large (say, 60 or 80Gb)
>filesystem? I remember a while ago someone (phk?) conducted a survey,
>but nothing seems to have come of it. In the meantime, the capacity of
>an average hard drive has increased
ED]]
:> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 7:53 PM
:> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:> Subject: Optimal UFS parameters
:>
:> What parameters should I choose for a large (say, 60 or 80Gb)
:> filesystem? I remember a while ago someone (phk?) conducted a survey,
:> but nothing seems to
dnesday, December 06, 2000 7:53 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Optimal UFS parameters
>
> What parameters should I choose for a large (say, 60 or 80Gb)
> filesystem? I remember a while ago someone (phk?) conducted a survey,
> but nothing seems to have come of it. In
What parameters should I choose for a large (say, 60 or 80Gb)
filesystem? I remember a while ago someone (phk?) conducted a survey,
but nothing seems to have come of it. In the meantime, the capacity of
an average hard drive has increased tenfold, and the defaults have
become even less reasonab
24 matches
Mail list logo
