Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:03:08 +0100 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large Filesystem Woes Message-ID: <xzp7jzysvqr.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <20040111005308.GD60996@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> (Peter Jeremy's message of "Sun, 11 Jan 2004 11:53:08 %2B1100") References: <20040109193551.GD39751@moo.sysabend.org> <20040110225509.GA60996@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <xzpr7y7s7wl.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040111005308.GD60996@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> writes: > - A statement "these options are no longer necessary and will be > be removed in a future release" in the newfs(8)-equivalent man > page should read more like "these options are essential" (this > relates to dimensioning metadata allocation based on the expected > total number of files). The default values hit undocumented > metadata extent count limits at about 500,000 files. The table > showing suggested dimensioning guidelines only goes to 800,000 files. Ugh. That's practically useless. And they actually charge money for this product? DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzp7jzysvqr.fsf>