From owner-freebsd-fs Sun Oct 1 3:14:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from post.mail.nl.demon.net (post-10.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D915637B503; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 03:14:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [212.238.54.101] (helo=freebie.demon.nl) by post.mail.nl.demon.net with smtp (Exim 3.14 #2) id 13fg8o-0007ig-00; Sun, 01 Oct 2000 10:14:43 +0000 Received: (from wkb@localhost) by freebie.demon.nl (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e91A8rZ11405; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 12:08:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wkb) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 12:08:53 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte To: Greg Lehey Cc: Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ccd with other filesystems Message-ID: <20001001120853.A11275@freebie.demon.nl> References: <20001001114540.G43885@wantadilla.lemis.com> <200010010228.TAA18618@usr05.primenet.com> <20001001120453.I43885@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20001001120453.I43885@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@lemis.com on Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:04:53PM +0930 X-OS: FreeBSD 4.1-STABLE X-PGP: finger wilko@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:04:53PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote: > On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:28:09 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > > Greg Writes: snip > >> I think this is a bug in newfs. It should only create file systems on > >> partitions of type 4.2BSD. Does anybody disagree? Otherwise I'll fix > >> it. > > > > I have several systems, where the entirety of the disk (the "c" > > partition) is mounted as a single file system. > > You can do it, but it's not a good idea. I'd like to see a good > reason for doing this. This discussion seems to occur more often. I, for one, would be interested to know what is so bad in using 'c' for a filesystem. Been doing it for years now, never had any problems. After all, 'c' is just the whole disk. I don't see the point in maken e.g. 'f' de whole disk and using that one. If the reason is only because 'c' overlaps all other partitions: there is no substitute for 'checking before doing' newfs. In short: please clarify. -- Wilko Bulte wilko@freebsd.org Arnhem, the Netherlands To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sun Oct 1 5:32:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from gidora.zeta.org.au (gidora.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F2B0237B66E for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 05:32:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 17128 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2000 12:32:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bde.zeta.org.au) (203.2.228.102) by gidora.zeta.org.au with SMTP; 1 Oct 2000 12:32:34 -0000 Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 23:32:29 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Greg Lehey Cc: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ccd with other filesystems In-Reply-To: <20001001114540.G43885@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 4:09:37 +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: > > i dont quite know why it is still possible doing a newfs on a 'c' > > partition, since the partition type is 'unused' and not > > '4.2BSD'. newfs should check this and throw an error while providing > > an expert-only-feature command line option to explicitly override > > it. > > I think this is a bug in newfs. This is a feature of newfs. It is almost device-independent. E.g., to create a filesystem in a regular file with no label in sight: dd if=/dev/zero of=foo oseek=2779 count=1 # -v and ./foo work around device dependence. # -T floppy is so that I don't have to type a lot of args for this example. newfs -v -T floppy ./foo > It should only create file systems on > partitions of type 4.2BSD. Does anybody disagree? Otherwise I'll fix > it. Disagree. The filesystem type field is normally an output of newfs, not an input. > > it is a bad thing[tm] to be able to wedge every single blockdev in your > > system by (ab)using newfs. > > Agreed. Disagree. It is a feature that write(2) works on disk devices (block devices went away) no matter how it is (ab)used. (There should be more write protection for mounted partitions, but a disk without any of its partitions mounted should be almost just a file.) Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sun Oct 1 6: 1: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA03937B66D; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 06:01:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA17171; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 23:59:10 +1100 Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 23:59:06 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Greg Lehey Cc: Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: <20001001131126.L43885@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:48:53 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > >> You can do it, but it's not a good idea. I'd like to see a good > >> reason for doing this. > > > > If "c" is defined to be "the whole disk" , and you want to use "the > > whole disk", it makes sense. > > No, you don't *ever* want a UFS on the whole disk, you want it on a > partition, because those are the objects on which file systems work. No, file systems work on disk devices. The disk device may be the whole disk device, a slice, or a partition. I sometimes use a slice. > That's OK. CD-ROMs don't have partitions. It's probably a bug that > we even have partition letters for non-partitioned media. cdroms have in-core labels, although this is a bug (they should work like unlabled whole disks or slices). Ken Merry has some code to support writable cdroms with real labels. > > I threw away this convention on many of my systems long ago, when I > > resigned myself to aving a DOS parititon table on my machines, when > > the Alpha and PReP platforms decided to require it as well. > > Is your 'h' key sticking? :-) I hoped to replace BSD partitions by native partitions on systems where native partitions are adequate. Native partitions always have to be supported, and another layer for BSD partitions mainly makes things more complicated. Unfortunately, my compatibility code was too good :). > I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use > it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find > convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way > that anybody can have any objection. Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sun Oct 1 10: 3:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.webmonster.de (datasink.webmonster.de [194.162.162.209]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D52BC37B502 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 10:03:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 446 invoked by uid 1000); 1 Oct 2000 17:03:50 -0000 Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 19:03:50 +0200 From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" To: Bruce Evans Cc: Greg Lehey , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ccd with other filesystems Message-ID: <20001001190350.B304@rohrbach.de> Reply-To: karsten@rohrbach.de References: <20001001114540.G43885@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from bde@zeta.org.au on Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 11:32:29PM +1100 X-Arbitrary-Number-Of-The-Day: 42 X-Sender: karsten@rohrbach.de Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Bruce Evans(bde@zeta.org.au)@Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 11:32:29PM +1100: > On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > > > On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 4:09:37 +0200, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: > > > i dont quite know why it is still possible doing a newfs on a 'c' > > > partition, since the partition type is 'unused' and not > > > '4.2BSD'. newfs should check this and throw an error while providing > > > an expert-only-feature command line option to explicitly override > > > it. > > > > I think this is a bug in newfs. > > This is a feature of newfs. It is almost device-independent. E.g., to > create a filesystem in a regular file with no label in sight: > > dd if=/dev/zero of=foo oseek=2779 count=1 > # -v and ./foo work around device dependence. > # -T floppy is so that I don't have to type a lot of args for this example. > newfs -v -T floppy ./foo and thats exactly the point... if you use -v it should work, if you dont the partition type must be 4.2BSD and it must not be mounted. no more no less? not reasonable? > > > It should only create file systems on > > partitions of type 4.2BSD. Does anybody disagree? Otherwise I'll fix > > it. > > Disagree. The filesystem type field is normally an output of newfs, not > an input. thats new for me... /k -- > Sure eating yogurt will improve your sex life. People know that if > you'll eat that stuff, you'll eat anything. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sun Oct 1 18:24:41 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3962737B502; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 18:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from grog@localhost) by wantadilla.lemis.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) id e921Ngh09168; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 10:53:42 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 10:53:42 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Bruce Evans Cc: Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) Message-ID: <20001002105342.A8937@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20001001131126.L43885@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from bde@zeta.org.au on Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 11:59:06PM +1100 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 23:59:06 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: >> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:48:53 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >> I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use >> it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find >> convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way >> that anybody can have any objection. > > Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. Because it's another layer of abstraction which doesn't add any functionality. Yes, there are claims that some BIOSes require it, but that makes the BIOSes broken. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 0:27:19 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from squishycow.goldenterrace.com.au (squishycow.goldenterrace.com.au [203.41.110.130]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ADE537B502; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roaming.cacheboy.net (unknown [203.41.110.145]) by squishycow.goldenterrace.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5AA419D17; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 18:27:05 +1100 (EST) Received: (from adrian@localhost) by roaming.cacheboy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e927R1801409; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 09:27:01 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from adrian) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 09:26:59 +0200 From: Adrian Chadd To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: fsck wrappers, commit candidate Message-ID: <20001002092659.A1395@roaming.cacheboy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, Sep 24, 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On Sun, Sep 24, 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > The trouble is that some of the FS strings have spaces in their filenames. > > > This might confuse a few people. > > > > How about mapping spaces to '_' characters - I doubt it would cause any > > namespace collisions. > > Yes, as bp mentioned to me before, so I'm thinking about passing the fsname > through a tolower() and a s/ /_/g before using it as a filename. > > Any problems with this? Ok, I've since done this and I've updated the tarball again at http://people.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck/ . This is the version which I would like to commit, so I'd like some feedback beforehand. Thanks! Adrian -- Adrian Chadd "The main reason Santa is so jolly is because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 0:51:29 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from c014.sfo.cp.net (c014-h022.c014.sfo.cp.net [209.228.12.86]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 25FB037B502 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:51:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 7650 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2000 00:51:23 -0700 Received: from d8c81e5f.dsl.flashcom.net (HELO quadrajet.flashcom.com) (216.200.30.95) by smtp.flashcom.net (209.228.12.86) with SMTP; 2 Oct 2000 00:51:23 -0700 X-Sent: 2 Oct 2000 07:51:23 GMT Received: (from guy@localhost) by quadrajet.flashcom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA00486; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:51:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gharris) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:51:22 -0700 From: Guy Harris To: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling Filesystems in bsd? (LFS, anyone?) Message-ID: <20001002005122.C352@quadrajet.flashcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > There are three patents of which I'm aware. > could you be more specific, please? A search of IBM's Patent Womplex: http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/ for patents assigned to Network Appliance ("Advanced Text" search) found: US patent 5,819,292 "Method for maintaining consistent states of a file system and for creating user-accessible read-only copies of a file system"; US patent 5,963,962 "Write anywhere file-system layout"; US patent 6,038,570 "Method for allocating files in a file system integrated with a RAID disk sub-system" (which isn't a patent on WAFL by itself, it's a patent on the way we try to arrange to write as many blocks in a stripe as possible). (The other patents of ours it found are US 6,119,244 "Coordinating persistent status information with multiple file servers" (on our failover mechanism), US 5,950,225 "Fly-by XOR for generating parity for data gleaned from a bus" (on a hardware mechanism for doing RAID XORing while transferring data - we don't use that, though), and US 5,948,110 "Method for providing parity in a raid sub-system using non-volatile memory" (on recording in-progress RAID stripe writes in NVRAM so that, if the system dies in the middle of a stripe write, we don't have to scan the entire RAID group to make sure the parity block is correct in all stripes).) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 14:13: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from smtp05.primenet.com (smtp05.primenet.com [206.165.6.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB02337B66D; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:13:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA23433; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:13:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAzyaaIT; Mon Oct 2 14:13:03 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA10784; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:12:36 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200010022112.OAA10784@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) To: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 21:12:36 +0000 (GMT) Cc: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), karsten@rohrbach.de (Karsten W. Rohrbach), andre@akademie3000.de (Andre Albsmeier), intmktg@CAM.ORG (Marc Tardif), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20001002105342.A8937@wantadilla.lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Oct 02, 2000 10:53:42 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Greg Lehey wrote: > On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 23:59:06 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > > On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > >> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:48:53 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > >> I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use > >> it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find > >> convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way > >> that anybody can have any objection. > > > > Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. > > Because it's another layer of abstraction which doesn't add any > functionality. Yes, there are claims that some BIOSes require it, but > that makes the BIOSes broken. Is this semi-misattribution to get even with me for not automatically including attribution, through my use of an older mail client? 8-). I think FreeBSD should work on these systems, even if they have "broken" BIOS'; this is normally done as a virus countermeasure. PS: Your mail server whines about Primenet being a SPAM source; that's just strange... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 14:23:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CEBD37B502; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 14:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA22103; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 13:51:28 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAieaOUP; Mon Oct 2 13:50:14 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA10099; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 13:52:24 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200010022052.NAA10099@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 20:52:24 +0000 (GMT) Cc: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), karsten@rohrbach.de (Karsten W. Rohrbach), andre@akademie3000.de (Andre Albsmeier), intmktg@CAM.ORG (Marc Tardif), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Bruce Evans" at Oct 01, 2000 11:59:06 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use > > it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find > > convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way > > that anybody can have any objection. > > Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. The PReP specification makes it crystal clear how you can support up to 2^32 sectors with the DOS partition table mechanism. It's perhaps the best documentation I've ever seen for the DOS partition table, and the 32 bit sector field. I'd have bought the thing for that documentation alone, had I known it was there when I needed it. PS: That's 112 TB, in LBA mode. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 16:39:12 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6A2F37B502; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 16:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from grog@localhost) by wantadilla.lemis.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) id e92NclS00695; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:08:47 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:08:46 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) Message-ID: <20001003090846.F372@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <200010022052.NAA10099@usr05.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200010022052.NAA10099@usr05.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 08:52:24PM +0000 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Monday, 2 October 2000 at 20:52:24 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >>> I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use >>> it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find >>> convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way >>> that anybody can have any objection. >> >> Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. > > The PReP specification makes it crystal clear how you can > support up to 2^32 sectors with the DOS partition table > mechanism. It's perhaps the best documentation I've ever > seen for the DOS partition table, and the 32 bit sector > field. I'd have bought the thing for that documentation > alone, had I known it was there when I needed it. Why do we need it? > PS: That's 112 TB, in LBA mode. I make 1 TB for signed sector numbers, which is what we already have. How do you get 112 TB out of 512*2**31? Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 18:49:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from gidora.zeta.org.au (gidora.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7516137B503 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 18:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 31816 invoked from network); 3 Oct 2000 01:49:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bde.zeta.org.au) (203.2.228.102) by gidora.zeta.org.au with SMTP; 3 Oct 2000 01:49:43 -0000 Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 12:49:38 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Terry Lambert Cc: Greg Lehey , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: <200010022052.NAA10099@usr05.primenet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use > > > it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find > > > convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way > > > that anybody can have any objection. > > > > Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. > > The PReP specification makes it crystal clear how you can > support up to 2^32 sectors with the DOS partition table > mechanism. It's perhaps the best documentation I've ever This is well known. It's more interesting that you can support up to about 2^32 partitions (all empty) or about 2^31 partitions (1 sector each). The main problems with the DOS partition table is that it has no signatures or checksums. > PS: That's 112 TB, in LBA mode. Only about 2TB. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 19:53:11 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA93337B502; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 19:53:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA28141; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 19:50:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr06.primenet.com(206.165.6.206) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAHfaWY2; Mon Oct 2 19:50:16 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA01796; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 19:52:51 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200010030252.TAA01796@usr06.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) To: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 02:52:51 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20001003090846.F372@wantadilla.lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Oct 03, 2000 09:08:46 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > The PReP specification makes it crystal clear how you can > > support up to 2^32 sectors with the DOS partition table > > mechanism. It's perhaps the best documentation I've ever > > seen for the DOS partition table, and the 32 bit sector > > field. I'd have bought the thing for that documentation > > alone, had I known it was there when I needed it. > > Why do we need it? Compatability? Interoperability? Booting disks on AlphaBIOS, Motorolla PowerStack machines, etc.? To avoid yet another gratuitous difference from the rest of the world? > > PS: That's 112 TB, in LBA mode. > > I make 1 TB for signed sector numbers, which is what we already have. > How do you get 112 TB out of 512*2**31? Sorry, 2TB (it's unsigned). 2^32 * 512 = 2.233383e+11 I guess I clicked again when I shouldn't have in the calculator; my bad. I should have done it in my head, instead; it's easy to say "4 billion over 2 times 1000". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Oct 2 21:10:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 127A937B502; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 21:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from grog@localhost) by wantadilla.lemis.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) id e9349Wp01648; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 13:39:32 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 13:39:32 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Terry Lambert Cc: Bruce Evans , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) Message-ID: <20001003133932.K759@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20001002105342.A8937@wantadilla.lemis.com> <200010022112.OAA10784@usr05.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <200010022112.OAA10784@usr05.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 09:12:36PM +0000 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Monday, 2 October 2000 at 21:12:36 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > Greg Lehey wrote: >> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 23:59:06 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: >>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: >>>> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:48:53 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >>>> I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use >>>> it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find >>>> convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way >>>> that anybody can have any objection. >>> >>> Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. >> >> Because it's another layer of abstraction which doesn't add any >> functionality. Yes, there are claims that some BIOSes require it, but >> that makes the BIOSes broken. > > Is this semi-misattribution to get even with me for not > automatically including attribution, through my use of an older mail > client? I see no "semi-misattribution", so I can't telln > I think FreeBSD should work on these systems, even if they have > "broken" BIOS'; Agreed. > this is normally done as a virus countermeasure. I suspect it's done from lack of clue. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 4: 1:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.over.ru (over.rinet.ru [195.54.192.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8432F37B502 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 04:01:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 851 invoked by uid 1001); 4 Oct 2000 11:00:52 -0000 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:00:52 +0400 From: Alex Povolotsky To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Specialised storage system? Message-ID: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello! I'm looking to try writing high-performance storage system for mail, intended to boost large free mail system. It seems to me that such a system will give enough performance gains while requiring less effor that a full-featured file system, and may provide good basis for writing a file-system later. Maybe someone will point me at existing attempts and/or join effort? Alex. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 5:29:18 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E12D037B66D for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 05:29:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA04013; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:28:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:28:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Alex Povolotsky Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? In-Reply-To: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Alex Povolotsky wrote: > I'm looking to try writing high-performance storage system for mail, > intended to boost large free mail system. > > It seems to me that such a system will give enough performance gains while > requiring less effor that a full-featured file system, and may provide good > basis for writing a file-system later. > > Maybe someone will point me at existing attempts and/or join effort? It might be interesting to adapt the Cyrus mail server to use IFS, Adrian Chadd's FFS-lite for backend storage. IFS only supports inode numbers as filenames, meaning constant lookup time for a vnode, eliminating the cost of directory and namespace management. He developed it for use with Squid, but you could imagine using it as a backing store for other services that provide their own meta-data management (AFS/Coda caches, news server backends, Cyrus mail server stuff, etc). Most of these would require improved service-layer database management, as both news servers and cyrus rely on the directory layout to indicate that a message belongs to a particular folder; putting that in a central database would realize real performance benefits however. Coda and AFS could probably be trivially modified to use IFS. Robert N M Watson robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 5:31:15 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE3537B503 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 05:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA99150; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:30:54 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Alex Povolotsky Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? References: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 04 Oct 2000 14:30:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: Alex Povolotsky's message of "Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:00:52 +0400" Message-ID: Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Alex Povolotsky writes: > I'm looking to try writing high-performance storage system for mail, > intended to boost large free mail system. If you want something that runs purely in userland, try: a) QMail's Maildir system (which Postfix also supports) b) Something similar to Squid or Diablo's storage systems, i.e. one file per object, with a hash function that spreads files across 65536 buckets organized in 256 directories with 256 subdirectories each, with (optionally) an index kept in a DBM file or something c) A commercial (or commercial-grade) relational database system (Oracle, PostgreSQL, Frontbase) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 15: 6:46 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from gidora.zeta.org.au (gidora.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B06D337B66C for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 12063 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2000 22:06:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bde.zeta.org.au) (203.2.228.102) by gidora.zeta.org.au with SMTP; 4 Oct 2000 22:06:36 -0000 Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:06:30 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Greg Lehey Cc: Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: <20001002105342.A8937@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 23:59:06 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > > On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > >> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:48:53 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: [actually, Greg wrote this, except for the quotes] > >> I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use > >> it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find > >> convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way > >> that anybody can have any objection. > > > > Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. > > Because it's another layer of abstraction which doesn't add any > functionality. Yes, there are claims that some BIOSes require it, but > that makes the BIOSes broken. It adds the following functionality: - up to 2^32 partitions (normally limited to 30 in FreeBSD). - inter-operability with other OS's. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 15:14:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.webmonster.de (datasink.webmonster.de [194.162.162.209]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0512E37B66D for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 88448 invoked by uid 1000); 4 Oct 2000 22:14:26 -0000 Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 00:14:26 +0200 From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" To: Robert Watson Cc: Alex Povolotsky , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? Message-ID: <20001005001426.D88159@rohrbach.de> Reply-To: karsten@rohrbach.de References: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from rwatson@freebsd.org on Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 08:28:43AM -0400 X-Arbitrary-Number-Of-The-Day: 42 X-Sender: karsten@rohrbach.de Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Robert Watson(rwatson@freebsd.org)@Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 08:28:43AM -0400: > > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Alex Povolotsky wrote: > > > I'm looking to try writing high-performance storage system for mail, > > intended to boost large free mail system. > > > > It seems to me that such a system will give enough performance gains while > > requiring less effor that a full-featured file system, and may provide good > > basis for writing a file-system later. > > > > Maybe someone will point me at existing attempts and/or join effort? > > It might be interesting to adapt the Cyrus mail server to use IFS, Adrian > Chadd's FFS-lite for backend storage. IFS only supports inode numbers as > filenames, meaning constant lookup time for a vnode, eliminating the cost > of directory and namespace management. He developed it for use with so, this would be the lower layer of the namesys approach as far as i get it, right? i think reiserfs tries to do this in a hierarchical manner, mapping the tree with meta information onto a flat namespace with the files containing payload data. and hell, a lot more, but anyway ;-) > Squid, but you could imagine using it as a backing store for other > services that provide their own meta-data management (AFS/Coda caches, > news server backends, Cyrus mail server stuff, etc). Most of these would > require improved service-layer database management, as both news servers > and cyrus rely on the directory layout to indicate that a message belongs > to a particular folder; putting that in a central database would realize > real performance benefits however. Coda and AFS could probably be > trivially modified to use IFS. if your 'application' has some nice strategy for mapping files into a flat namespace (say: numbered files, 1-d) this might be a nice idea. implementing some storage on that for rdbms purpose would be a good point to start. for mail, i think, you need the abstraction layer in-between to have hierarchical constructs in directory and metadata and of course permissions. > > Robert N M Watson > > robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ > PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 > TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message -- > May the source be with you! KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 17:45:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C47137B503; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 17:45:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from grog@localhost) by wantadilla.lemis.com (8.11.0/8.9.3) id e950isl11832; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:14:54 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:14:54 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Bruce Evans Cc: Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) Message-ID: <20001005101454.I7292@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <20001002105342.A8937@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from bde@zeta.org.au on Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 09:06:30AM +1100 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thursday, 5 October 2000 at 9:06:30 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > >> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 23:59:06 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: >>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: >>>> On Sunday, 1 October 2000 at 2:48:53 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: > [actually, Greg wrote this, except for the quotes] >>>> I strongly object to the Microsoft "partition" table, and I don't use >>>> it myself. And of course you're welcome to use whatever you find >>>> convenient. It's not until you advocate making this a standard way >>>> that anybody can have any objection. >>> >>> Why? It is only broken in different ways than the BSD label. >> >> Because it's another layer of abstraction which doesn't add any >> functionality. Yes, there are claims that some BIOSes require it, but >> that makes the BIOSes broken. > > It adds the following functionality: > - up to 2^32 partitions (normally limited to 30 in FreeBSD). > - inter-operability with other OS's. OK, I rephrase that: it adds functionality that is seldom needed. Nearly all my boxes only run a single operating system, and there's no need for this additional bloat. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 18:58: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B7F37B502 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 18:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA14094; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 21:57:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 21:57:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" Cc: Alex Povolotsky , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? In-Reply-To: <20001005001426.D88159@rohrbach.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: > if your 'application' has some nice strategy for mapping files into a > flat namespace (say: numbered files, 1-d) this might be a nice idea. > implementing some storage on that for rdbms purpose would be a good > point to start. for mail, i think, you need the abstraction layer > in-between to have hierarchical constructs in directory and metadata and > of course permissions. The reason I suggested Cyrus and IFS is that Cyrus already assumes a sealed-box solution, and stores one message per file, keeping meta-data in an independent per-folder hashed database. This model allows a far closer match between message box and file system storage and manipulation semantics: messages are hardly ever modified, but frequently added and removed. Taking out the namespace concerns dramatically reduces the cost of even synchronous deletes, as there are no dependencies other than free lists (which fsck can pick up). There would be increased dependence on a comprehensive database to store meta-data in, perhaps a folder-name-to-inode-number hash could be used for efficiency. Just suggestions. Robert N M Watson robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 19:50: 5 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from gidora.zeta.org.au (gidora.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DDB4137B67D for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 19:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 23516 invoked from network); 5 Oct 2000 02:49:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bde.zeta.org.au) (203.2.228.102) by gidora.zeta.org.au with SMTP; 5 Oct 2000 02:49:53 -0000 Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:49:48 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Greg Lehey Cc: Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: <20001005101454.I7292@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > On Thursday, 5 October 2000 at 9:06:30 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: [about Microsoft "partition" table] > > It adds the following functionality: > > - up to 2^32 partitions (normally limited to 30 in FreeBSD). > > - inter-operability with other OS's. > > OK, I rephrase that: it adds functionality that is seldom needed. > Nearly all my boxes only run a single operating system, and there's no > need for this additional bloat. I'll rephrase that again: it adds functionality that is seldom needed by you :-). Nearly all my boxes run between 2 and 4 operating systems, not counting old versions on old disks/partitions/removable-media/vmware- virtual-disks, although the active ones normally only run FreeBSD-current. Bcue To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 20:46:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from relay.butya.kz (butya-gw.butya.kz [212.154.129.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AF1337B503 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 20:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by relay.butya.kz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1957328887; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:46:35 +0700 (ALMST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.butya.kz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1028D287DF; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:46:35 +0700 (ALMST) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:46:34 +0700 (ALMST) From: Boris Popov To: Greg Lehey Cc: Bruce Evans , Terry Lambert , "Karsten W. Rohrbach" , Andre Albsmeier , Marc Tardif , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: <20001005101454.I7292@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Greg Lehey wrote: > > It adds the following functionality: > > - up to 2^32 partitions (normally limited to 30 in FreeBSD). > > - inter-operability with other OS's. > > OK, I rephrase that: it adds functionality that is seldom needed. > Nearly all my boxes only run a single operating system, and there's no > need for this additional bloat. I'm have only one box to run things on, and this becomes an issue when you buy a large disk but can't put enough OSes on it. -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 4 21:56:11 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856CF37B503; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 21:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA24131; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 21:53:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr07.primenet.com(206.165.6.207) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAzdai8U; Wed Oct 4 21:53:15 2000 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr07.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA07319; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 21:55:45 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200010050455.VAA07319@usr07.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) To: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 04:55:44 +0000 (GMT) Cc: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), karsten@rohrbach.de (Karsten W. Rohrbach), andre@akademie3000.de (Andre Albsmeier), intmktg@CAM.ORG (Marc Tardif), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20001005101454.I7292@wantadilla.lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Oct 05, 2000 10:14:54 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > It adds the following functionality: > > - up to 2^32 partitions (normally limited to 30 in FreeBSD). > > - inter-operability with other OS's. > > OK, I rephrase that: it adds functionality that is seldom needed. > Nearly all my boxes only run a single operating system, and there's no > need for this additional bloat. I have a box that shares a swap paritition between FreeBSD and Linux, which can only be accomplisged via a DOS partition table. I would bet that the vast majority of laptops have FreeBSD plus a Microsoft OS installed on them, due to FreeBSD's inability to run some increasingly common laptop hardware. I also suspect that 95% of all FreeBSD machines with a DVD ROM drive in them are dual boot, laptop or not: DVD EOM drives are not better than CDROM drives, on FreeBSD. I know that _ALL_ machines with a BIOS requirement for DOS partitioning are running a DOS partition table. I also know that all machines with a BIOS requirement, due to antivirus requirements, which may be driven by the organization making the purchase, for an MBR that passes the 8 validity tests for an MBR, must be running something other than "dangerously dedicated", since FreeBSDs boot records and its boot manager do not pass these tests (e.g. the AA55 checksum to zero, etc.). For that matter, I guarantee all legacy machines with large drives are running an MBR that has a DOS partition table in it, with the MBR loading a BIOS patching TSR to add LBA support, and then adjusting the BIOS-visible location of sector 0. Also, if it's preferred, somehow, why do we call it "dangerously dedicated" instead of just calling it "default"? 8-p Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 3:56:13 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F54237B503 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 03:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id MAA82502; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:56:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA13318; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:56:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:56:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Bruce Evans Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > This is well known. It's more interesting that you can support up > to about 2^32 partitions (all empty) or about 2^31 partitions (1 sector > each). The main problems with the DOS partition table is that it has > no signatures or checksums. Regarding checksums; true. This is a shortcoming, though it can be worked around by abusing the space normally used for code. Regarding signatures; the signature 0xaa55 (intel byte order) trails the four slots holding the actual layout data. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 4: 8:26 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAECD37B502; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 04:08:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id NAA85220; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:08:21 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA13381; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:08:20 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:08:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Robert Watson Cc: Alex Povolotsky , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [...snip...] You might also want to change the indirection scheme somewhat for a mail server, to gain another two direct blocks while losing the double and triple indirect blocks. This depends on whether the users are expected to send gargantuan mails, however. You might hack the mail program to deposit the larger files on another volume, backed by FFS. Also, you'd probably want to back the central directory to a raw device to avoid indirection. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 4:17:11 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E8BD37B502 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 04:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id NAA87344; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:17:07 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA13458; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:17:04 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:17:04 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Greg Lehey Cc: Bruce Evans , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Partitioning (was: ccd with other filesystems) In-Reply-To: <20001005101454.I7292@wantadilla.lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > OK, I rephrase that: it adds functionality that is seldom needed. > Nearly all my boxes only run a single operating system, and there's no > need for this additional bloat. To date, I've never run a FreeBSD _workstation_ that didn't share disks with another operating system. Also, the ability for FreeBSD to coexist with other systems has been one of the vital ingredients for me when I am trying to convince a potential new user to try it out. I think you would need to do an extensive poll to be able to track whether this configuration is "seldom" used. And as to bloat, I am certain there are less needed parts of the system you could just as easily trim away. For example, have a look at all the legacy code in msdosfs. If anyone wants them, I've got patches lying about that fix this. Haven't gotten around to send-pr'ing them yet. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 4:54:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.over.ru (over.rinet.ru [195.54.192.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3FE9537B502 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 04:49:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 70697 invoked by uid 1001); 5 Oct 2000 11:39:58 -0000 Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:39:57 +0400 From: Alex Povolotsky To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Specialised mailstorage system? Message-ID: <20001005153957.E65600@mail.over.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 02:30:53PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > If you want something that runs purely in userland, try: Not sure. I'm rather looking for userland prototype with possible kernel release... > a) QMail's Maildir system (which Postfix also supports) Creating and removing messages is QUITE expensive. Also, access to large maildir (thousands of files) is slow. Things based on FFS (usenetfs...) can help with the second issue, but relatively slow metadata ops if deep inside FFS. > b) Something similar to Squid or Diablo's storage systems, i.e. one > file per object, with a hash function that spreads files across > 65536 buckets organized in 256 directories with 256 subdirectories > each, with (optionally) an index kept in a DBM file or something I'd look closely at these. > c) A commercial (or commercial-grade) relational database system > (Oracle, PostgreSQL, Frontbase) I beleive that highly specialised mail storage system will yield sufficently higher performance than 'generic' database. A typical lifecycle of file is: create write/read many times, with resizing delete So metadata performance is not very important A typical lifecycle of article/cached page is create and write read many times delete So metadata operations is not important as well But a typical lifecycle of email message is create and write read several times, most likely once or two sequental reading (HEAD/RETR) delete So metadata operation is AS important as file. I'm thinking of Btree with mailbox names and several variations of chunk-based allocation for messages themselves. I'm thinking either of some log-structured system, or btree of message numbers with explict grouping on mailboxes and in-page storage of small mails (about 14k...) With 128k buffers (I think it is the optimal buffer size for disk I/O nowadays) and about 64 Mbs of buffers for btrees first access to a mailbox will not require more than 10-12 disk operations (6-10 on filled-cache case) and subsequental accesses to this box will require no more than 1 disk op per file, actually about 1 operation per 4-6 messages. Anyone to criticize? Alex. ----- End forwarded message ----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 6:30:56 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from cache.sh.cvut.cz (cache.sh.cvut.cz [147.32.127.204]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5BD037B502 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 06:30:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hell.sh.cvut.cz (klausik@hell.sh.cvut.cz [147.32.121.148]) by cache.sh.cvut.cz (8.9.3/8.8.8/Silicon Hill/Antispam/29.3.1998) with ESMTP id PAA18699 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:30:52 +0200 Received: (from klausik@localhost) by hell.sh.cvut.cz (8.9.3/8.9.2) id PAA37760 for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:30:47 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from klausik) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 15:30:47 +0200 From: Jaroslav Klaus To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Recommendation for video FS Message-ID: <20001005153047.A37440@hell.sh.cvut.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.5-STABLE Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello, I have 4x45GB IBM ATA66 drives for FTP server to be filled up with ISO images (~650MB). Access to this server is only from a hundreds of PCs in 100Mb LAN. What would be you recommendation for FS/RAID 0 parameters optimized for downloading ISO images from FTP server at a maximum speed. The typical traffic is: cca 200 PCs downloads cca 50 different ISO images (FTP is mandatory) not exactly at the same time (shifted about 100-200MB). FTP server uses sendfile(2) but could be changed, of course. I'm interested in parameters: a) RAID 0 strip size b) FS block size c) FS fragment size d) noatime e) anything else? Thank you. Jarda To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 8:14:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.webmonster.de (datasink.webmonster.de [194.162.162.209]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2452437B66C for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 08:14:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 6705 invoked by uid 1000); 5 Oct 2000 15:14:28 -0000 Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 17:14:28 +0200 From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" To: Robert Watson Cc: Alex Povolotsky , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? Message-ID: <20001005171428.B6607@rohrbach.de> Reply-To: karsten@rohrbach.de References: <20001005001426.D88159@rohrbach.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from rwatson@freebsd.org on Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 09:57:50PM -0400 X-Arbitrary-Number-Of-The-Day: 42 X-Sender: karsten@rohrbach.de Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org i am currently reading the patents on wafl ;-) anyone interested? i got the scans as .gif badly written (at least for my bad english) for tech folks but very interesting. /k Robert Watson(rwatson@freebsd.org)@Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 09:57:50PM -0400: > On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Karsten W. Rohrbach wrote: > > > if your 'application' has some nice strategy for mapping files into a > > flat namespace (say: numbered files, 1-d) this might be a nice idea. > > implementing some storage on that for rdbms purpose would be a good > > point to start. for mail, i think, you need the abstraction layer > > in-between to have hierarchical constructs in directory and metadata and > > of course permissions. > > The reason I suggested Cyrus and IFS is that Cyrus already assumes a > sealed-box solution, and stores one message per file, keeping meta-data in > an independent per-folder hashed database. This model allows a far closer > match between message box and file system storage and manipulation > semantics: messages are hardly ever modified, but frequently added and > removed. Taking out the namespace concerns dramatically reduces the cost > of even synchronous deletes, as there are no dependencies other than free > lists (which fsck can pick up). There would be increased dependence on a > comprehensive database to store meta-data in, perhaps a > folder-name-to-inode-number hash could be used for efficiency. Just > suggestions. > > Robert N M Watson > > robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ > PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 > TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services > > -- > question = ( to ) ? be : ! be; // Wm. Shakespeare KR433/KR11-RIPE -- http://www.webmonster.de -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 9:17:41 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from blackhelicopters.org (geburah.blackhelicopters.org [209.69.178.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 435F437B503 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:17:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mwlucas@localhost) by blackhelicopters.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA78539 for fs@freebsd.org; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:17:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mwlucas) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 12:17:35 -0400 From: Michael Lucas To: fs@freebsd.org Subject: mount_union panic info? Message-ID: <20001005121735.A78527@blackhelicopters.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Is there any interest in panic info from mount_union, or is this still a case of "ha! we told you so?" ==ml -- Michael Lucas mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org http://www.blackhelicopters.org/~mwlucas/ Big Scary Daemons: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/q/Big_Scary_Daemons To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 5 20:59:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from relay.butya.kz (butya-gw.butya.kz [212.154.129.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7AF037B502 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 20:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by relay.butya.kz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 125C528AAF; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:59:50 +0700 (ALMST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.butya.kz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F296928645; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:59:49 +0700 (ALMST) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:59:49 +0700 (ALMST) From: Boris Popov To: Michael Lucas Cc: fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mount_union panic info? In-Reply-To: <20001005121735.A78527@blackhelicopters.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Michael Lucas wrote: > Is there any interest in panic info from mount_union, or is this still > a case of "ha! we told you so?" unionfs is in the my "to look on" list... -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 7 1: 1:46 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from peorth.iteration.net (peorth.iteration.net [208.190.180.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E43537B503 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 01:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by peorth.iteration.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 60A795730D; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 03:02:02 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 03:02:02 -0500 From: "Michael C . Wu" To: Alex Povolotsky Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? Message-ID: <20001007030202.C41952@peorth.iteration.net> Reply-To: "Michael C . Wu" Mail-Followup-To: "Michael C . Wu" , Alex Povolotsky , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru>; from tarkhil@over.ru on Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 03:00:52PM +0400 X-FreeBSD-Header: This is a subliminal message from the vast FreeBSD conspiracy project. X-Operating-System: FreeBSD peorth.iteration.net 4.1.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 4.1.1-RELEASE Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 03:00:52PM +0400, Alex Povolotsky scribbled: | I'm looking to try writing high-performance storage system for mail, | intended to boost large free mail system. Please read http://people.freebsd.org/~adrian/ or contact him via adrian@freebsd.org But I think, as others have said, a database oriented system like squid/inn or a real db would probably work better. -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | keichii@peorth.iteration.net | keichii@bsdconspiracy.net | | http://peorth.iteration.net/~keichii | Yes, BSD is a conspiracy. | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 7 2: 6:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.over.ru (over.rinet.ru [195.54.192.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D266337B502 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 02:06:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 31417 invoked by uid 1001); 7 Oct 2000 09:06:26 -0000 Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 13:06:26 +0400 From: Alex Povolotsky To: "Michael C . Wu" Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? Message-ID: <20001007130626.A30963@mail.over.ru> References: <20001004150052.E32009@mail.over.ru> <20001007030202.C41952@peorth.iteration.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20001007030202.C41952@peorth.iteration.net>; from keichii@iteration.net on Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 03:02:02AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 03:02:02AM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote: > But I think, as others have said, a database oriented system like > squid/inn or a real db would probably work better. AFAIK, all FFS-based systems suffers from relatively low metadata performance, and most oftem mails are read ONCE before deletion. Thus, I think that specialised mail storage will yield better performance. Anyway, I'm waiting for criticizm, but not abstract like 'Oracle will do it better'. Alex. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 7 7:40:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C06C537B66E for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 07:40:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA82826; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:40:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:40:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Alex Povolotsky Cc: "Michael C . Wu" , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? In-Reply-To: <20001007130626.A30963@mail.over.ru> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Alex Povolotsky wrote: > On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 03:02:02AM -0500, Michael C . Wu wrote: > > But I think, as others have said, a database oriented system like > > squid/inn or a real db would probably work better. > AFAIK, all FFS-based systems suffers from relatively low metadata > performance, and most oftem mails are read ONCE before deletion. Thus, I > think that specialised mail storage will yield better performance. FFS is slow for meta-data because it provides strong failure-resistent consistency guarantees for its namespace. As I have pointed out several times, if those guarantees are too strong to your needs, you should fall back on FFS only as an intelligent backing store for integer-named files, and then provide your own meta-data storage, probably in one of the early files on the partition. The UNIX message format (one file per mailbox) is certainly something you want to avoid, but once you throw out the naming and directory system, the inode->file mechanism is quite a decent approximation of message behavior (cheap create, delete, write-once, read-many operations), and as I think Terry pointed out, you can reallocate block and indirect block pointers in the inode based on your expected message size. You can then use a file-based database to store mail folder meta-data, probably one folder per file, perhaps allocating the first file inode to be an index of folders (or something else depending on contention). You could even use dbm or something, although that scales poorly to large database write operations. Since the messages tend not to have modify/extend/shrink operations, you even have really nice fragmentation properties. But I'd definitely attempt to keep the meta-data logic for folder indexes and so on in userland, and rely on a more general backing store. Robert N M Watson robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 7 7:41:29 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4CD137B503 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 07:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA82834; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:41:24 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:41:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Alex Povolotsky Cc: "Michael C . Wu" , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Specialised storage system? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > read-many operations), and as I think Terry pointed out, you can Actually, in retrospect, I think it was Marius. Robert N M Watson robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message