From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Oct 26 1:54: 2 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from akat.civ.cvut.cz (akat.civ.cvut.cz [147.32.235.105]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7FF2415348 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 01:53:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pechy@hp735.cvut.cz) Received: from localhost (pechy@localhost) by akat.civ.cvut.cz (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id KAA19169; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 10:53:55 +0200 Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 10:53:54 +0200 From: Jan Pechanec X-Sender: pechy@akat.civ.cvut.cz To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Working filesystem stacking - where to find it ? 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 Hello, please, where can I find _working_ filesystem stacking? AFAIK, FreeBSD 3.x distributions don't contain working implementation. FreeBSD 2.x? NetBSD, OpenBSD, 4.4 (I am not sure it 4.4 is downloadable and installable on Intel) ??? I would like to look at it closely, so except source code, I want to play with it. Thank you, Jan Pechanec. -- Jan PECHANEC (mailto:pechy@hp735.cvut.cz) Computing Center CTU (Zikova 4, Praha 6, 166 35, Czech Republic) http://www.civ.cvut.cz, tel: +420 2 2435 2969, http://pechy.civ.cvut.cz To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Oct 26 9:41:49 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from cs.columbia.edu (cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C6014F40 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 09:41:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu) Received: from shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.18.15]) by cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA13962; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 12:41:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ezk@localhost) by shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id MAA27061; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 12:41:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 12:41:32 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199910261641.MAA27061@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu: ezk set sender to ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu using -f From: Erez Zadok To: Jan Pechanec Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Working filesystem stacking - where to find it ? In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 26 Oct 1999 10:53:54 +0200." Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message , Jan Pechanec writes: > > Hello, > > please, where can I find _working_ filesystem stacking? AFAIK, > FreeBSD 3.x distributions don't contain working implementation. > FreeBSD 2.x? NetBSD, OpenBSD, 4.4 (I am not sure it 4.4 is > downloadable and installable on Intel) ??? > > I would like to look at it closely, so except source code, I > want to play with it. > > Thank you, Jan Pechanec. > > -- > Jan PECHANEC (mailto:pechy@hp735.cvut.cz) > Computing Center CTU (Zikova 4, Praha 6, 166 35, Czech Republic) > http://www.civ.cvut.cz, tel: +420 2 2435 2969, http://pechy.civ.cvut.cz > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message I've "fixed" stacking in freebsd 3.0, by using synchronous writes, and using read/write for getpage/putpage. My code does not change anything in the kernel; all my work is inside loadable, stackable f/s kernel modules. It's slower than what it should be, but it works, without having to dive into the controversy of how to fix the broken freebsd VFS. This was done in an early 3.0, and I've not had the chance to see what it takes to port it to 3.3 or 4.0. I suspect not much, but at least the newer lkm interface should be used. http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research/software/ Feel free to contact me in you have any questions regarding my code. Erez. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Oct 26 21:25: 5 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DBE514A18 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:25:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id AAA34426 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 00:26:52 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 00:26:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Journaling 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 the subject of a journaled file system for FreeBSD: I am sure a lot of people have pondered the construction of a journaled file system for FreeBSD. I would like to see these pondering's become a reality. I have been speaking to a variety of people who are very interested in becoming involved in such a project should one be started. Basically I would like to know if anyone here is interested in creating a journaled file system and who would be willing to donate time and programming skills to such a project. This would be a rather large undertaking but it would get FreeBSD a world class file system. Also, some work along these lines was already done with LFS and it does not look as if XFS is going to be strolling down the pike any time soon. (And even if it did it wont have a copyright that FreeBSD could really use) In summary: I am assuming there is no journaled file system project already under way. (If there is please let me know so that I can donate any help I can) This project would need people willing to work hard and who would be willing to use the BSD license for their work. This project would not be meant to replace or usurp either softupdates or UFS for a long time. It is meant to provide a more fault tolerant, flexible, "free" (i.e. BSD license) file system for FreeBSD. Any information that anyone is willing to share would be very welcome. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Oct 26 21:54:47 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D78E14FD4 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:54:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@wintelcom.net) Received: from localhost (bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA24811; Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:16:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Alfred Perlstein To: Don Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling 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 On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Don wrote: > On the subject of a journaled file system for FreeBSD: Kirk McKusick has been working for the last year or so on a combination of "soft-updates" (complete) and "snapshots" (not released yet), once complete FFS will have the equivelant of logging AND snapshots like the netapp appliance. In so far as codebase there is the LFS project, currently fixed (afaik) in NetBSD, perhaps porting that to FreeBSD would be worthwhile. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 4:34:59 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6527414F56 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 04:34:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id HAA35006; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:36:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:36:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling 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 > Kirk McKusick has been working for the last year or so on > a combination of "soft-updates" (complete) and "snapshots" > (not released yet), once complete FFS will have the equivelant > of logging AND snapshots like the netapp appliance. I am familiar with softupdates but not with snapshots. The reason for starting a new project was basically to once and for all get rid of UFS. While there is nothing wrong with UFS it does have some limitations which I would like to eliminate such as a limit of 7 slices. I would also like to add functionality such as the ability to grow and shrink partitions etc. Softupdates is also not recommended for use on the root partition and it still seems to be just a little flaky. Every once in a while I wind up with a problem which I have traced to softupdates but which I could not recreate. (To be fair I have not had a problem in a month or two now) > In so far as codebase there is the LFS project, currently > fixed (afaik) in NetBSD, perhaps porting that to FreeBSD > would be worthwhile. This is indeed going to be the starting point for this project but I hope I would be able to take it far beyond this. -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 7:18: 5 1999 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 D67F714C92 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:18:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) 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 KAA22599; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:17:36 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:17:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: Don Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling 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 I would love to see full journaling/logging for meta-data -- softupdates is cool, but seems to be a hard-coding of the rules as opposed to a general journaling fs. Specifically, I'd love to see a journaling fs with extensible meta-data attributes, such as supported by XFS. This would put us in a situation where adding new structures to the fs didn't require understanding the internals of the journalling--this way someone (say me) could add new meta-data (say ACLs) and not have to deal with the realities of softupdates, or even fsck. IRIX XFS adds two new vops, a getexattr and setexattr for named extensions that are also logged. The Linux people, to add ACL support, are using extra blocks on the file system. The problem with this is that if the user can coerce a kernel failure (i.e., crash the system, cut the power, whatever), they can induce inconsistencies in the ACL and inode versions, meaning that if they time it right, they can influence the content of the ACLs, or other security data (MAC tags, etc). With a logged extensible meta-data system, this could not happen. Someone mentioned at one point that they were looking at porting XFS to FreeBSD. I assume XFS is under some sort of community license and not a BSD license, but it might be a good place to start. On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Don wrote: > On the subject of a journaled file system for FreeBSD: > > I am sure a lot of people have pondered the construction of a journaled > file system for FreeBSD. I would like to see these pondering's become a > reality. > > I have been speaking to a variety of people who are very interested in > becoming involved in such a project should one be started. Basically I > would like to know if anyone here is interested in creating a journaled > file system and who would be willing to donate time and programming skills > to such a project. > > This would be a rather large undertaking but it would get FreeBSD a world > class file system. Also, some work along these lines was already done with > LFS and it does not look as if XFS is going to be strolling down the pike > any time soon. (And even if it did it wont have a copyright that FreeBSD > could really use) > > In summary: > I am assuming there is no journaled file system project already under way. > (If there is please let me know so that I can donate any help I can) > This project would need people willing to work hard and who would be > willing to use the BSD license for their work. > This project would not be meant to replace or usurp either softupdates or > UFS for a long time. It is meant to provide a more fault tolerant, > flexible, "free" (i.e. BSD license) file system for FreeBSD. > > Any information that anyone is willing to share would be very welcome. > > -don > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message > 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 27 7:41:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from pau-amma.whistle.com (pau-amma.whistle.com [207.76.205.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3C314C92 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:41:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dhw@whistle.com) Received: (from dhw@localhost) by pau-amma.whistle.com (8.9.2/8.9.2) id HAA31103; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:40:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:40:16 -0700 (PDT) From: David Wolfskill Message-Id: <199910271440.HAA31103@pau-amma.whistle.com> To: bright@wintelcom.net, don@calis.blacksun.org Subject: Re: Journaling Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 07:36:38 -0400 (EDT) >From: Don >> Kirk McKusick has been working for the last year or so on >> a combination of "soft-updates" (complete) and "snapshots" >> (not released yet), once complete FFS will have the equivelant >> of logging AND snapshots like the netapp appliance. >I am familiar with softupdates but not with snapshots. Take a look at Network Appliance's "WAFL". (They have some white papers up on their Web site, http://www.netapp.com/. In particular, the one at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3002.html descibes WAFL and snapshots.) >The reason for >starting a new project was basically to once and for all get rid of UFS. ? >While there is nothing wrong with UFS it does have some limitations which >I would like to eliminate such as a limit of 7 slices. With all due respect, that assertion mkes about as much sense as saying that its bits are the wrong color. How a device is carved into separate areas, any one of which may hold some kind of file system, has little (if anything) to do with how one of those file systems happens to be designed. Indeed, it is quite possible for different slices to be used in different ways -- some as UFS file systems, some as swap spaces (which are not file systems at all), some as some other form of file system. And none of that addresses any "limit of 7 slices." >I would also like to add functionality such as the ability to grow and >shrink partitions etc. That would be something that I would welcome. I expect that many others would, as well. There has been a fair amount already written on the topic, both in FreeBSD lists and at USENIX-sponsored conferences. >Softupdates is also not recommended for use on the root partition and >it still seems to be just a little flaky. Every once in a while I wind up >with a problem which I have traced to softupdates but which I could >not recreate. (To be fair I have not had a problem in a month or two now) I will grant that I've been able to create certain kinds of problems in a soft updates environment -- for example, getting a bit too aggressive about trying to reclaim recently freed blocks when the file system is nearly full can cause some writes to fail, and applications that don't deal with that very gracefully can easily engender cascade failures. It is, however, still somewhat of a work in progress (from what I understand). As such, its current limitations are unlikely to match either the design point or the limitations that will be in effect (say) several months from now. If soft updates is used within its current limitations (ref. the earlier comment about write failures), it seems to work well enough that I've been enabling it on the Engineers' desktops here. And except for deliberate attempts to stress things to the breaking point (some of which I have perpetrated), I've not been informed of any breakage. Cheers, david -- David Wolfskill dhw@whistle.com UNIX System Administrator voice: (650) 577-7158 pager: (888) 347-0197 FAX: (650) 372-5915 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 8:23:49 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from freebie.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFC9014FFE for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 08:23:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@freebie.lemis.com) Received: (grog@localhost) by mojave.worldwide.lemis.com (8.9.3/8.6.12) id JAA00942; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:54:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19991027095431.45462@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:54:31 -0400 From: Greg Lehey To: Don , Alfred Perlstein Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i In-Reply-To: ; from Don on Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 07:36:38AM -0400 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 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-41-739-7062 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 7:36:38 -0400, Don wrote: >> Kirk McKusick has been working for the last year or so on >> a combination of "soft-updates" (complete) and "snapshots" >> (not released yet), once complete FFS will have the equivelant >> of logging AND snapshots like the netapp appliance. > > I am familiar with softupdates but not with snapshots. The reason for > starting a new project was basically to once and for all get rid of UFS. > While there is nothing wrong with UFS it does have some limitations which > I would like to eliminate such as a limit of 7 slices. I think you're mixing things up here. Journalling and the number of slices available have nothing to do with anything. Anyway, the Vinum layer effectively removes this limitation. > I would also like to add functionality such as the ability to grow > and shrink partitions etc. There is currently a project underway to grow file systems. Nobody's been interested enough to shrink them (which is a lot more work), but I'd guess it would be less difficult than writing a whole new fs. > Softupdates is also not recommended for use on the root partition > and it still seems to be just a little flaky. Possibly, but it's not clear that it will ever be flakier than a new file system :-) > Every once in a while I wind up with a problem which I have traced > to softupdates but which I could not recreate. (To be fair I have > not had a problem in a month or two now) > >> In so far as codebase there is the LFS project, currently >> fixed (afaik) in NetBSD, perhaps porting that to FreeBSD >> would be worthwhile. > > This is indeed going to be the starting point for this project but I hope > I would be able to take it far beyond this. You might also take a look at SGI's xfs. 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 27 9:52: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C71A14C9E for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:51:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA35362; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:53:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:53:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Robert Watson Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling 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 > I would love to see full journaling/logging for meta-data -- softupdates > is cool, but seems to be a hard-coding of the rules as opposed to a > general journaling fs. Specifically, I'd love to see a journaling fs with > extensible meta-data attributes, such as supported by XFS. This would put > us in a situation where adding new structures to the fs didn't require > understanding the internals of the journalling--this way someone (say me) > could add new meta-data (say ACLs) and not have to deal with the realities > of softupdates, or even fsck. IRIX XFS adds two new vops, a getexattr and > setexattr for named extensions that are also logged. Exactly! I would like to create a more flexible file system. > The Linux people, to add ACL support, are using extra blocks on the file > system. The problem with this is that if the user can coerce a kernel > failure (i.e., crash the system, cut the power, whatever), they can induce > inconsistencies in the ACL and inode versions, meaning that if they time > it right, they can influence the content of the ACLs, or other security > data (MAC tags, etc). With a logged extensible meta-data system, this > could not happen. Agreed. There is actually a thread on freebsd-hackers about this same topic which I would like to bring to this list. > Someone mentioned at one point that they were looking at porting XFS to > FreeBSD. I assume XFS is under some sort of community license and not a > BSD license, but it might be a good place to start. I would prefer not to even bother with XFS other than as a feature reference. There license is not going to be a BSD license and as such I dont want to bother porting it. -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 9:59: 5 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 082F514A24 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:59:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id NAA35386; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:00:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:00:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: David Wolfskill Cc: bright@wintelcom.net, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <199910271440.HAA31103@pau-amma.whistle.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 > Take a look at Network Appliance's "WAFL". (They have some white > papers up on their Web site, http://www.netapp.com/. In particular, the > one at http://www.netapp.com/tech_library/3002.html descibes WAFL and > snapshots.) Excellent. Thank you. > >starting a new project was basically to once and for all get rid of UFS. > ? UFS is not flexible enough and I would prefer not to start adding a million features to UFS if I am still stuck without a journaled core. > With all due respect, that assertion mkes about as much sense as saying > that its bits are the wrong color. How a device is carved into separate > areas, any one of which may hold some kind of file system, has little (if > anything) to do with how one of those file systems happens to be designed. UFS on top of FFS has a limit of 7 slices per partition. This is an issue with FFS rather than UFS however it is still a problem. I would like to see all of these limitations removed. > That would be something that I would welcome. I expect that many others > would, as well. There has been a fair amount already written on the > topic, both in FreeBSD lists and at USENIX-sponsored conferences. Absolutely. The purpose of this thread is really to gather ideas from people so that I know what everyone is looking for from a file system. This way the proper features can be designed in right from the start. > It is, however, still somewhat of a work in progress (from what I > understand). I agree that it is a work in progress although others have stated that it is completed. > As such, its current limitations are unlikely to match > either the design point or the limitations that will be in effect (say) > several months from now. If soft updates is used within its current > limitations (ref. the earlier comment about write failures), it seems to > work well enough that I've been enabling it on the Engineers' desktops > here. And except for deliberate attempts to stress things to the > breaking point (some of which I have perpetrated), I've not been informed > of any breakage. I have no issues with soft-updates. I think it performs admirably. I think however that it could be faster and unless the license has changed I dont agree with it. I would like to have a file system that could actually be delivered with the OS instead of having to be enabled as an add-on. (I am going to check the license now as I could be completely off and the license could have been changed) -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 10: 3:55 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79B1E14CCB for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:03:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id NAA35403; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:05:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:05:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Greg Lehey Cc: Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <19991027095431.45462@mojave.worldwide.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 > I think you're mixing things up here. Journalling and the number of > slices available have nothing to do with anything. Anyway, the Vinum > layer effectively removes this limitation. Again this is a result of UFS on top of FFS (AFAIK). You can not have more than 7 UFS slices per FFS partition. (Please forgive any mistaken references here as I should not be near this computer with the flu that I appear to have.) > There is currently a project underway to grow file systems. Nobody's > been interested enough to shrink them (which is a lot more work), but > I'd guess it would be less difficult than writing a whole new fs. What good is the ability to grow a partition without the ability to shrink another? (That is rhetorical. I realize that when adding a disk it will help but in the case of "I ran out of space and I need to expand this FS into that one it does not help") > > Softupdates is also not recommended for use on the root partition > > and it still seems to be just a little flaky. > Possibly, but it's not clear that it will ever be flakier than a new > file system :-) Agreed but I would like to try. I also do not like the softupdates license (again unless it has changed) as I want a fs that I can distribute with the os instead of as an add on. > You might also take a look at SGI's xfs. Again I would love to but the license will not be compatible and I would prefer not to contaminate this project. I intend to use XFS as a feature reference but not as a code reference. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 10:32:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mail.du.gtn.com (mail.du.gtn.com [194.77.9.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD4A14F9B for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:32:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ticso@mail.cicely.de) Received: from mail.cicely.de (cicely.de [194.231.9.142]) by mail.du.gtn.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA05333; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:25:40 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by mail.cicely.de (8.9.0/8.9.0) id TAA52215; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:32:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:32:00 +0200 From: Bernd Walter To: Don Cc: Greg Lehey , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling Message-ID: <19991027193200.A52144@cicely7.cicely.de> References: <19991027095431.45462@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 01:05:22PM -0400, Don wrote: > > I think you're mixing things up here. Journalling and the number of > > slices available have nothing to do with anything. Anyway, the Vinum > > layer effectively removes this limitation. > Again this is a result of UFS on top of FFS (AFAIK). You can not have more > than 7 UFS slices per FFS partition. (Please forgive any mistaken > references here as I should not be near this computer with the flu that I > appear to have.) The number of partitions has nothing to do with with the filesystem you use. FFS is not a partitionsheme but a filesystem. UFS is a historic filesystem on which FFS is based. Today we usually mean with UFS the family of UFS derived filesystems such as FFS, MFS or LFS and it declares in the implementation the common things. The Limit of 7 partionions is not of any interest if you use vinum. Vinum should be able to manage in 1 partion more volumes than you will want. > > > There is currently a project underway to grow file systems. Nobody's > > been interested enough to shrink them (which is a lot more work), but > > I'd guess it would be less difficult than writing a whole new fs. > What good is the ability to grow a partition without the ability to shrink > another? (That is rhetorical. I realize that when adding a disk it will > help but in the case of "I ran out of space and I need to expand this FS > into that one it does not help") I'm also intersted in having a way to shrink an FFS filesystem, but it is much more difficult than growing and you have to rename inodes which is not always good. At this moment I'm thinking of some ways to retain the inode numbers. In the more common case your system is getting to small and you want to have another HDD added - so only be able to grow does make sense. -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.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 27 14:19:10 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C48F814E0E for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:19:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id RAA35688; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:20:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:20:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Bernd Walter Cc: Greg Lehey , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <19991027193200.A52144@cicely7.cicely.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 > The Limit of 7 partionions is not of any interest if you use vinum. > Vinum should be able to manage in 1 partion more volumes than you will want. Ok nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to go before it can be used in a production environment. My question then becomes what causes the 7 (partition, mount point, slice, whatever) limit? FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris all share this limitation. Since they only share UFS (AFAIK) I had assumed it was the fault of UFS. > I'm also intersted in having a way to shrink an FFS filesystem, but it is > much more difficult than growing and you have to rename inodes which is not > always good. > At this moment I'm thinking of some ways to retain the inode numbers. > In the more common case your system is getting to small and you want to > have another HDD added - so only be able to grow does make sense. For me the issue has always been a mistake in the allocation of space on my disks. The reult being a reinstall (as I usually have more than enough space and do not want to add disks). This does not happen often but when it does happen it is a pain. When I run out of space I can usually simply add the other drive to another mount point and the ability to grow a partition becomes a none issue. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 14:39: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from panzer.kdm.org (panzer.kdm.org [216.160.178.169]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C9A14E0E for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:39:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ken@panzer.kdm.org) Received: (from ken@localhost) by panzer.kdm.org (8.9.3/8.9.1) id PAA11180; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:38:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from ken) Message-Id: <199910272138.PAA11180@panzer.kdm.org> Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: from Don at "Oct 27, 1999 05:20:42 pm" To: don@calis.blacksun.org (Don) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:38:27 -0600 (MDT) Cc: ticso@cicely.de (Bernd Walter), grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Kenneth D. Merry" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] 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 Don wrote... > > The Limit of 7 partionions is not of any interest if you use vinum. > > Vinum should be able to manage in 1 partion more volumes than you will want. > Ok nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to > go before it can be used in a production environment. My question then > becomes what causes the 7 (partition, mount point, slice, whatever) limit? > FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris all share this limitation. Since they only > share UFS (AFAIK) I had assumed it was the fault of UFS. Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and shouldn't normally be used. This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told me). With FreeBSD at least, if you use 4 DOS-type primary partitions, or slices, you can stick a disklabel on each slice and have up to 32 partitions. I've got machine with 3 slices in use on one disk, and 6 partitions per slice in use on that disk, for a total of 18 partitions in use. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@kdm.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 27 14:52:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from freebie.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E852C15556 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:52:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@freebie.lemis.com) Received: (grog@localhost) by mojave.worldwide.lemis.com (8.9.3/8.6.12) id RAA03015; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:37:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <19991027173720.06226@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:37:20 -0400 From: Greg Lehey To: Don , Bernd Walter Cc: Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling References: <19991027193200.A52144@cicely7.cicely.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i In-Reply-To: ; from Don on Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 05:20:42PM -0400 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 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-41-739-7062 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 17:20:42 -0400, Don wrote: >> The Limit of 7 partionions is not of any interest if you use vinum. >> Vinum should be able to manage in 1 partion more volumes than you will want. > > Ok nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to > go before it can be used in a production environment. Oh, does it? What problems have you seen? You'd better tell all the people who are using it in production, too. > My question then becomes what causes the 7 (partition, mount point, > slice, whatever) limit? It's the BSD disk label format. > FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris all share this limitation. Since they > only share UFS (AFAIK) I had assumed it was the fault of UFS. UFS on System V uses the System V partition table, which allows 15 partitions. I don't know what use even 7 are, which is probably one of the reasons nobody has done anything about it. >> I'm also intersted in having a way to shrink an FFS filesystem, but it is >> much more difficult than growing and you have to rename inodes which is not >> always good. >> At this moment I'm thinking of some ways to retain the inode numbers. >> In the more common case your system is getting to small and you want to >> have another HDD added - so only be able to grow does make sense. > > For me the issue has always been a mistake in the allocation of space on > my disks. The reult being a reinstall (as I usually have more than enough > space and do not want to add disks). Yes, this is the usual result of using too many file system partitions. > This does not happen often but when it does happen it is a > pain. When I run out of space I can usually simply add the other > drive to another mount point and the ability to grow a partition > becomes a none issue. I'm not sure what you're talking about here, but the best thing I can think of is Vinum. 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 27 15:23:17 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from charon.fmi.com (charon.fmi.com [157.33.227.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CA8814BCE for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:23:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com) Received: from babylon.nola.fmi.com (babylon.nola.fmi.com [157.33.3.49]) by charon.fmi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA05749; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:22:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from exsysadm.irja.fcx.com (exsysadm.irja.fcx.com [157.47.15.198]) by babylon.nola.fmi.com (8.6.9/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA10742; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:22:14 -0500 Received: from fmi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by exsysadm.irja.fcx.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA01657; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:30:54 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com) Message-ID: <38177D1E.56435DBE@fmi.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:30:54 +1000 From: Brendon Meyer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kenneth D. Merry" Cc: Don , Bernd Walter , Greg Lehey , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling References: <199910272138.PAA11180@panzer.kdm.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------FFF05FC985896B3780AEFBC8" Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --------------FFF05FC985896B3780AEFBC8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Kenneth D. Merry" wrote: > Don wrote... > > > The Limit of 7 partionions is not of any interest if you use vinum. > > > Vinum should be able to manage in 1 partion more volumes than you will want. > > Ok nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to > > go before it can be used in a production environment. My question then > > becomes what causes the 7 (partition, mount point, slice, whatever) limit? > > FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris all share this limitation. Since they only > > share UFS (AFAIK) I had assumed it was the fault of UFS. > > Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and > shouldn't normally be used. > > This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe > that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told > me). Excuse the mixing of terms here but System V Release 4 and System V Release 4.2 have a VTOC (Volume Table Of Contents) which has 16 partitions/slices. Like the BSD disklabel scheme, one of the partitions is reserved to represent the entire volume. In System V Release 4 they actually used a separate slice to represent hotfixing areas as well but that appeared to be depreciated in SVR4.2. -- Brendon Meyer (Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com) PT Mineserve International / PT Freeport Indonesia / Freeport McMoran Timika, Tembagapura, Jakarta, Singapore, Cairns, New Orleans --------------FFF05FC985896B3780AEFBC8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Kenneth D. Merry" wrote:
Don wrote...
> > The Limit of 7 partionions is not of any interest if you use vinum.
> > Vinum should be able to manage in 1 partion more volumes than you will want.
> Ok nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to
> go before it can be used in a production environment. My question then
> becomes what causes the 7 (partition, mount point, slice, whatever) limit?
> FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Solaris all share this limitation. Since they only
> share UFS (AFAIK) I had assumed it was the fault of UFS.

Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and
shouldn't normally be used.

This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation.  I believe
that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told
me).


Excuse the mixing of terms here but System V Release 4 and System V Release 4.2 have a VTOC (Volume Table Of Contents) which has 16 partitions/slices.  

Like the BSD disklabel scheme, one of the partitions is reserved to represent the entire volume.

In System V Release 4 they actually used a separate slice to represent hotfixing areas as well but that appeared to be depreciated in SVR4.2.
  

-- 
Brendon Meyer
(Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com)
PT Mineserve International / PT Freeport Indonesia / Freeport McMoran
Timika, Tembagapura, Jakarta, Singapore, Cairns, New Orleans
  --------------FFF05FC985896B3780AEFBC8-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 18:46:59 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C3214A21 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:46:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id VAA36052; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:48:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:48:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: "Kenneth D. Merry" Cc: Bernd Walter , Greg Lehey , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <199910272138.PAA11180@panzer.kdm.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 > Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and > shouldn't normally be used. Correct C represents the entire disk. > This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe > that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told > me). I will have to check this out. Thanks for the info. Is there any reason that disklabel has this limit? > With FreeBSD at least, if you use 4 DOS-type primary partitions, or slices, > you can stick a disklabel on each slice and have up to 32 partitions. I've > got machine with 3 slices in use on one disk, and 6 partitions per slice in > use on that disk, for a total of 18 partitions in use. I knew this could be done but it just seemed like a kludge to me. I appreciate all of the feedback. This is sounding more and more like a project I would like to start. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 18:57:48 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CEA514D0D for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:57:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id VAA36072; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:59:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:59:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Greg Lehey Cc: Bernd Walter , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <19991027173720.06226@mojave.worldwide.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 > Oh, does it? What problems have you seen? You'd better tell all the > people who are using it in production, too. Ok can we stop with the insults? The point of this thread is research not attacks on anyone. I have seen problems with disk mirroring using vinum in which attempting to synchronize a new disk after a previous had failed caused a kernel panic and left me with no way to recreate the failed disk. This may have been fixed, however. At the time the problem was reproduceable and I did not have the time to investigate further. > It's the BSD disk label format. That I discovered. I appreciate the answer. > UFS on System V uses the System V partition table, which allows 15 > partitions. I don't know what use even 7 are, which is probably one > of the reasons nobody has done anything about it. Actually I simply run everything off of the root partition and allocate all of the space to that. > Yes, this is the usual result of using too many file system > partitions. No this is a result of a mistake in estimating the size that a given partition should be. This includes /var and / (although perhaps I should simply have a single file system mounted off of /) > I'm not sure what you're talking about here, but the best thing I can > think of is Vinum. Vinum is a volume manager. I dont see why it keeps coming up in reference to a journaled file system. It is a key element to an HA cluster, however one does not require the other. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 19: 4:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A86914CC3 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:04:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id WAA36097; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:06:30 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:06:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Greg Lehey Cc: Bernd Walter , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <19991027173720.06226@mojave.worldwide.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 nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to > > go before it can be used in a production environment. > > Oh, does it? What problems have you seen? You'd better tell all the > people who are using it in production, too. Perhaps you should read the vinum known bugs page. That list is far too long for a production application. If you dont feel it is too long then by all means use it. When I stop seeing the words "data corruption" and "kernel panic" on the known bugs page then I will use vinum. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 19:14:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78EB314CC3 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 19:14:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id WAA36119 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:16:43 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 22:16:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Journaling 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 Here is the question plain and simple: Does anyone here want a journaled file system for FreeBSD? Such a file system would be built from the ground up to include such things as the ability to grow and shrink the fs size, acl's on files, an expandable architecture, journaling, etc. If people want it I will go through the effort of getting together the programming talent necessary to do it. (Read: not me as I do not have the skills to do anything other than manage a project like this) If people do not want it then I will drop it now. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Oct 27 20: 6:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from panzer.kdm.org (panzer.kdm.org [216.160.178.169]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BE8214F6F for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 20:06:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ken@panzer.kdm.org) Received: (from ken@localhost) by panzer.kdm.org (8.9.3/8.9.1) id VAA13281; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:05:04 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from ken) Message-Id: <199910280305.VAA13281@panzer.kdm.org> Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: from Don at "Oct 27, 1999 09:48:31 pm" To: don@calis.blacksun.org (Don) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:05:04 -0600 (MDT) Cc: ken@kdm.org (Kenneth D. Merry), ticso@cicely.de (Bernd Walter), grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Kenneth D. Merry" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] 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 Don wrote... > > Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and > > shouldn't normally be used. > Correct C represents the entire disk. > > > This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe > > that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told > > me). > I will have to check this out. Thanks for the info. Is there any reason > that disklabel has this limit? It has been that way for a long time. I'm not sure why the limit is 8, but it is. (Someone might know. I suspect it was just an arbitrary value chosen a long time ago.) Changing it might break backwards compatibility, though. Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@kdm.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 28 1:51:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8AF914CD4 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:51:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (silvia [209.109.233.59]) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA02862; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:43:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id BAA05958; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:43:01 -0700 (PDT) To: "Kenneth D. Merry" Cc: don@calis.blacksun.org (Don), ticso@cicely.de (Bernd Walter), grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), bright@wintelcom.net (Alfred Perlstein), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling References: <199910280305.VAA13281@panzer.kdm.org> From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 28 Oct 1999 01:42:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: "Kenneth D. Merry"'s message of "Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:05:04 -0600 (MDT)" Message-ID: Lines: 17 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: "Kenneth D. Merry" * It has been that way for a long time. I'm not sure why the limit is 8, but * it is. (Someone might know. I suspect it was just an arbitrary value * chosen a long time ago.) Changing it might break backwards compatibility, * though. It's because there were only 8 bits in the device minor number. They decided to divide that into 5 bits for the device ID (giving us 32 disks of the same type) and 3 bits for partition ID (8 partitions). Since then, we've added 16 more bits to the device numbers but none of them were allocated to partitions.... (See the comment near the bottom of /usr/include/sys/disklabel.h.) Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 28 9:43:42 1999 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 1F6CD14BC7 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:43:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) 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 MAA31105; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:43:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:43:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: Don Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling 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 On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Don wrote: > Here is the question plain and simple: > Does anyone here want a journaled file system for FreeBSD? yes. > Such a file system would be built from the ground up to include such > things as the ability to grow and shrink the fs size, acl's on files, an > expandable architecture, journaling, etc. > > If people want it I will go through the effort of getting together the > programming talent necessary to do it. (Read: not me as I do not have > the skills to do anything other than manage a project like this) > > If people do not want it then I will drop it now. I think that having a journaled file system with extensible file attributes is a good idea--look at how easily XFS can be extended to support new features, yet to do this in a transactional way with meta-data. There are numerous concerns with adding new features to an FS, and having a journaled extensible FS would throw a bunch of them out the window (updating fsck to handle the new features, dealing with the consistency and atomicity issues, etc). That said, writing a journaled fs is not easy :-). BTW, I'd like to know how the layered file system people planned to address consistency between layers in the event of a failure -- i.e., a system crash occurs, how do you verify that the ACLs in an ACLfs layer are consistent with the attributes in the Attributefs layer, and that those are consistent with the actual files stored in the bottom layer? The only way to do this properly would seem to be through journaling and some kind of transaction system that knows about layers and treats it as a nested transaction? 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 Thu Oct 28 9:49: 3 1999 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 0B8D415252 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:48:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) 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 MAA31120 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:48:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:48:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: stupidfs - easily extensible test file systems? 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 I'm in the process of hacking up a stupidfs -- i.e., a minimal file system module that provides simplistic (i.e., stupid) implementations of all the relevant vnops and vfsops based on in-kernel memory. The purpose of stupidfs is to allow file system extension developers (like myself) to be able to add new vnops and implement them in a simple file system without having to deal initially with the issue of permenant storage in the file stores, distributed file systems, etc. It would be a poor-man's MFS (although perhaps more useful than MFS because it doesn't have the weight of UFS/FFS tangled up in it, which is what has stopped me from using MFS to do the same kind of testing), with it only really being useful for this testing purpose. However, as this will take a little bit to write, I thought I'd ask if anyone else has done this already? :-) Right now I pretty much have it to the point where I can see the directory structure, create files of up to 1k, etc, etc, but there's a fair amount more to do before it's useful. Those people working on ACLs and MACs for POSIX.1e have needed a test framework that doesn't involve seriously hurting themselves on the sharp edges of FFS and MFS, but that still allows them to actually see the results in a file system. Layering would be another option [if only it worked]. And even with layering, there are still complications in implementation -- more complicated, than saying "gee, let's extend the inode to have *this* structure in it" and just having it work as it backs to nothing and isn't tangled up in the idea of backing to something (e.g., MFS). 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 Thu Oct 28 10: 0:13 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from login-2.eunet.no (login-2.eunet.no [193.71.71.239]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3151214C99 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 09:59:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (mbendiks@login-1.eunet.no [193.71.71.238]) by login-2.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id SAA81361; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:59:54 +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 SAA27855; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:59:54 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:59:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Bernd Walter Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <19991027193200.A52144@cicely7.cicely.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 > I'm also intersted in having a way to shrink an FFS filesystem, but it is > much more difficult than growing and you have to rename inodes which is not > always good. > At this moment I'm thinking of some ways to retain the inode numbers. > In the more common case your system is getting to small and you want to > have another HDD added - so only be able to grow does make sense. This is another place where (shoot me if I'm wrong), stacking layers would be handy. One could make a stacking layer to provide inode remapping. Or, if this is the wrong approach, one could add code to FFS to allow inode remapping metadata. This way, one could rename the physical inode and update the mapping. Or am I way off mark here? 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 28 10:53:28 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5394C14E26 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 10:53:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id NAA37430; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 13:53:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 13:53:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Robert Watson Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling 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 > yes. Awesome. > I think that having a journaled file system with extensible file > attributes is a good idea--look at how easily XFS can be extended to > support new features, yet to do this in a transactional way with > meta-data. There are numerous concerns with adding new features to an FS, > and having a journaled extensible FS would throw a bunch of them out the > window (updating fsck to handle the new features, dealing with the > consistency and atomicity issues, etc). There are two reasons for starting this project. The first is to provide FreeBSD with a very flexible, extensible file system that is truly enterprise calibur. The second is to not have to worry about the softupdates license. > That said, writing a journaled fs is not easy :-). This is completely understood. It took Veritas forever to add the ability to shrink file system to Veritas File System. The goal is ot get the ball rolling. If things start to work out then I can forsee about 10 people working on this quite a bit (Not including anyone from this list who wants to help out.) I have started getting some systems together as well as the people who would be working on this. I have also starting gathering the information necessary to do this (including about 30 different texts which I will need to read) -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 28 14:23: 1 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from cs.columbia.edu (cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2920214C18 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 14:22:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu) Received: from shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.18.15]) by cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA11546; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 17:22:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ezk@localhost) by shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA07811; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 17:22:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 17:22:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199910282122.RAA07811@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu: ezk set sender to ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu using -f From: Erez Zadok To: Robert Watson Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: stupidfs - easily extensible test file systems? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 28 Oct 1999 12:48:55 EDT." Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Robert, it's been done. To some degree that's nullfs (if nullfs had been working; the VFS is broken). I've written stackable f/s templates exactly for the purpose of developers using them to build other f/s w/o having the many hassles of writing a full f/s. My wrapper templates, called wrapfs, work on freebsd, linux, and solaris. You can build all kinds of f/s using them, including f/s that do not require persistent storage. See http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research for papers, and http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research/software for tarballs. Let me know if you have any questions. Erez Zadok. Columbia University Department of Computer Science. EMail: ezk@cs.columbia.edu Web: http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Oct 28 15:34:41 1999 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 39FD2152F8 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 15:34:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) 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 SAA33260; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:32:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:32:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: Erez Zadok Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: stupidfs - easily extensible test file systems? In-Reply-To: <199910282122.RAA07811@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> 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, 28 Oct 1999, Erez Zadok wrote: > Robert, it's been done. To some degree that's nullfs (if nullfs had been > working; the VFS is broken). I've written stackable f/s templates exactly > for the purpose of developers using them to build other f/s w/o having the > many hassles of writing a full f/s. My wrapper templates, called wrapfs, > work on freebsd, linux, and solaris. You can build all kinds of f/s using > them, including f/s that do not require persistent storage. > > See > http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research > for papers, and > http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research/software > for tarballs. > > Let me know if you have any questions. Any chance you have a version that does klds on 3.3? :-) I'm rebuilding my kernel to include klds, but would prefer to use klds since they're the current thing :-). 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 Thu Oct 28 21: 6:27 1999 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 C9320151F1 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 21:06:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) 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 AAA34300; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 00:06:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 00:06:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: Erez Zadok Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: stupidfs - easily extensible test file systems? 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 In answer to my own email--I loaded the lkm.ko kld to provide lkm support, but that didn't seem to work either: # kldstat Id Refs Address Size Name 1 3 0xc0100000 2e73a4 kernel 2 1 0xc09cf000 e000 linux.ko 3 1 0xc0b98000 3000 lkm.ko # modstat Type Id Off Loadaddr Size Info Rev Module Name # modload nullfs_mod.o ld: /kernel: malformed input file (not rel or archive) modload: /usr/bin/ld: return code 1 I suppose this means it's running the ELF version of ld, not the a.out version, but I really don't know enough about how it works to comment much more on the matter. :-) Thanks, Robert On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Robert Watson wrote: > On Thu, 28 Oct 1999, Erez Zadok wrote: > > > Robert, it's been done. To some degree that's nullfs (if nullfs had been > > working; the VFS is broken). I've written stackable f/s templates exactly > > for the purpose of developers using them to build other f/s w/o having the > > many hassles of writing a full f/s. My wrapper templates, called wrapfs, > > work on freebsd, linux, and solaris. You can build all kinds of f/s using > > them, including f/s that do not require persistent storage. > > > > See > > http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research > > for papers, and > > http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/research/software > > for tarballs. > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > Any chance you have a version that does klds on 3.3? :-) I'm rebuilding > my kernel to include klds, but would prefer to use klds since they're the > current thing :-). > > 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 > > 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 Thu Oct 28 22:14:46 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from cs.columbia.edu (cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8930714FDF for ; Thu, 28 Oct 1999 22:14:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu) Received: from shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.18.15]) by cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA16810; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 01:14:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ezk@localhost) by shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA17512; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 01:14:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 01:14:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199910290514.BAA17512@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu: ezk set sender to ezk@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu using -f From: Erez Zadok To: Robert Watson Cc: Erez Zadok , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: stupidfs - easily extensible test file systems? In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 28 Oct 1999 18:32:33 EDT." Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message , Robert Watson writes: [...] > Any chance you have a version that does klds on 3.3? :-) I'm rebuilding > my kernel to include klds, but would prefer to use klds since they're the > current thing :-). Yes, it's on my todo list for the next two weeks. Of course if someone ported my wrapfs to work w/ klds, I'll be happy to release a new package that includes that support... Erez. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Oct 29 9: 6:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from yana.lemis.com (yana.lemis.com [192.109.197.140]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD7B15112 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:06:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: from mojave.worldwide.lemis.com ([199.103.141.157]) by yana.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA23743 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 01:36:08 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Message-ID: <19991029095858.50758@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:58:58 -0400 From: Greg Lehey To: Bernd Walter , Don Cc: Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling References: <19991027095431.45462@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> <19991027193200.A52144@cicely7.cicely.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <19991027193200.A52144@cicely7.cicely.de>; from Bernd Walter on Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 07:32:00PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 19:32:00 +0200, Bernd Walter wrote: > The number of partitions has nothing to do with with the filesystem you use. > FFS is not a partitionsheme but a filesystem. > UFS is a historic filesystem on which FFS is based. Well, in fact they're the same thing. The *old* name is FFS (Fast File System). When System V.4 was released, they adopted FFS as the standard file system and called it the UNIX File System. 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 Fri Oct 29 9: 7:25 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from yana.lemis.com (yana.lemis.com [192.109.197.140]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50D6156E4 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:07:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: from mojave.worldwide.lemis.com ([199.103.141.157]) by yana.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA23764 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 01:37:05 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Message-ID: <19991028085348.39481@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:53:48 -0400 From: Greg Lehey To: "Kenneth D. Merry" , Don Cc: Bernd Walter , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling References: <199910280305.VAA13281@panzer.kdm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <199910280305.VAA13281@panzer.kdm.org>; from Kenneth D. Merry on Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 09:05:04PM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 21:05:04 -0600, Kenneth D. Merry wrote: > Don wrote... >>> Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and >>> shouldn't normally be used. >> Correct C represents the entire disk. >> >>> This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe >>> that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told >>> me). >> >> I will have to check this out. Thanks for the info. Is there any reason >> that disklabel has this limit? > > It has been that way for a long time. I'm not sure why the limit is 8, but > it is. (Someone might know. I suspect it was just an arbitrary value > chosen a long time ago.) Changing it might break backwards compatibility, > though. There was some discussion about increasing it at one point. But as you say, it would probably confuse some programs, and I personally don't see any need. 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 Fri Oct 29 9: 7:26 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from yana.lemis.com (yana.lemis.com [192.109.197.140]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33C0B15715 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:07:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: from mojave.worldwide.lemis.com ([199.103.141.157]) by yana.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA23761 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 01:36:59 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Message-ID: <19991028085243.24656@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 08:52:43 -0400 From: Greg Lehey To: Don Cc: Bernd Walter , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling References: <19991027173720.06226@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Don on Wed, Oct 27, 1999 at 09:59:23PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 21:59:23 -0400, Don wrote: >>> [snipped in original: claim that Vinum wasn't ready for production] >> >> Oh, does it? What problems have you seen? You'd better tell all the >> people who are using it in production, too. > > Ok can we stop with the insults? The point of this thread is research not > attacks on anyone. I have seen problems with disk mirroring using vinum in > which attempting to synchronize a new disk after a previous had failed > caused a kernel panic and left me with no way to recreate the failed disk. > This may have been fixed, however. At the time the problem was > reproduceable and I did not have the time to investigate further. If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody hears it, did it fall? As I said above: "What problems have you seen?". A kernel panic (is there any other kind?) is a matter you should report. We *have* had problems in Vinum; as you say, this isn't necessarily the case at the moment. >> UFS on System V uses the System V partition table, which allows 15 >> partitions. I don't know what use even 7 are, which is probably one >> of the reasons nobody has done anything about it. > Actually I simply run everything off of the root partition and allocate > all of the space to that. > >> Yes, this is the usual result of using too many file system >> partitions. > > No this is a result of a mistake in estimating the size that a given > partition should be. This includes /var and / (although perhaps I > should simply have a single file system mounted off of /) Indeed. But my crystal ball is broken, and I can't find anybody to repair it. How do *you* forsee the future? In any case, even if you can, what benefit do you have from a maze of twisty little file systems, all different? >> I'm not sure what you're talking about here, but the best thing I can >> think of is Vinum. > > Vinum is a volume manager. I dont see why it keeps coming up in reference > to a journaled file system. It doesn't. You were talking about partitioning, which also has nothing to do with a journalling file system. On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 22:06:30 -0400, Don wrote: >>> Ok nevermind :) Either way vinum is not up to snuff. It still has a way to >>> go before it can be used in a production environment. >> >> Oh, does it? What problems have you seen? You'd better tell all the >> people who are using it in production, too. > > Perhaps you should read the vinum known bugs page. What was that you were saying about insults above? > That list is far too long for a production application. Ah. Could you define the correct length? "0" is not an answer. > If you dont feel it is too long then by all means use it. When I > stop seeing the words "data corruption" and "kernel panic" on the > known bugs page then I will use vinum. Maybe you should read the context. 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 Fri Oct 29 9:22: 2 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0795E14DA1 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:21:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA04409; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:19:08 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Greg Lehey Cc: Bernd Walter , Don , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:58:58 EDT." <19991029095858.50758@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:19:08 +0200 Message-ID: <4407.941213948@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message <19991029095858.50758@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com>, Greg Lehey writes: >On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 19:32:00 +0200, Bernd Walter wrote: >> The number of partitions has nothing to do with with the filesystem you use. >> FFS is not a partitionsheme but a filesystem. >> UFS is a historic filesystem on which FFS is based. > >Well, in fact they're the same thing. The *old* name is FFS (Fast >File System). When System V.4 was released, they adopted FFS as the >standard file system and called it the UNIX File System. ...Whereas in *BSD "UFS" refers to the unix sematics layer (directory manipulation and all that) and "FFS" refers to the underlying storage object manager (which only understands inodes and their layout.) -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Oct 29 10:10:36 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B77CC14E7E for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:10:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr02.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA06986; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:10:30 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr02.primenet.com(206.165.6.202) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpd006899; Fri Oct 29 10:10:22 1999 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA16646; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 10:10:15 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199910291710.KAA16646@usr02.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Journaling To: ken@kdm.org (Kenneth D. Merry) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 17:10:14 +0000 (GMT) Cc: don@calis.blacksun.org, ken@kdm.org, ticso@cicely.de, grog@lemis.com, bright@wintelcom.net, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199910280305.VAA13281@panzer.kdm.org> from "Kenneth D. Merry" at Oct 27, 99 09:05:04 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] 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 > > > This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe > > > that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told > > > me). > > > > I will have to check this out. Thanks for the info. Is there any reason > > that disklabel has this limit? > > It has been that way for a long time. I'm not sure why the limit is 8, but > it is. (Someone might know. I suspect it was just an arbitrary value > chosen a long time ago.) Changing it might break backwards compatibility, > though. NetBSD currently supports 16. Yes, it breaks backward compatability. 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 Fri Oct 29 14:51:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from charon.fmi.com (charon.fmi.com [157.33.227.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB43155B8 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 14:51:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com) Received: from babylon.nola.fmi.com (babylon.nola.fmi.com [157.33.3.49]) by charon.fmi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA03204; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 16:50:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from exsysadm.irja.fcx.com (exsysadm.irja.fcx.com [157.47.15.198]) by babylon.nola.fmi.com (8.6.9/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA01201; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 16:50:41 -0500 Received: from fmi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by exsysadm.irja.fcx.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA03378; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 07:59:24 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com) Message-ID: <381A18BB.48C2F4E0@fmi.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 07:59:24 +1000 From: Brendon Meyer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Lehey Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling References: <199910280305.VAA13281@panzer.kdm.org> <19991028085348.39481@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------05EC013FE31FB7BB9593D362" Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --------------05EC013FE31FB7BB9593D362 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg Lehey wrote: > On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 21:05:04 -0600, Kenneth D. Merry wrote: > > Don wrote... > >>> Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and > >>> shouldn't normally be used. > >> Correct C represents the entire disk. > >> > >>> This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation. I believe > >>> that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told > >>> me). > >> > >> I will have to check this out. Thanks for the info. Is there any reason > >> that disklabel has this limit? > > > > It has been that way for a long time. I'm not sure why the limit is 8, but > > it is. (Someone might know. I suspect it was just an arbitrary value > > chosen a long time ago.) Changing it might break backwards compatibility, > > though. > > There was some discussion about increasing it at one point. But as > you say, it would probably confuse some programs, and I personally > don't see any need. Ok this is really starting to get off topic on the point of the original thread but I would like to make a comment though. While I agree that expanding the current disklabel may break some existing stuff, I do beg to disagree about the need (this is an opinion so take it with the appropriate grain of salt). There are two situations where you can quite easily 'run out' of partitions. 1. Physically large individual data volumes. Example is a DPT RAID configuration of a 4 x 32 GB disk RAID 5 array which then presents the resultant RAID 5 disk array to the system as an individual 96 GB drive. 2. System disk with more than 1 'DOS' style partition already in use (example: DOS/95/98 + BSD + LINUX). With individually large data volumes the 'sting' is somewhat reduce by the judicious use of FDISK slices, but it is not removed entirely. With most servers having individual volumes <60Gb this scheme generally works reasonable well but I can tell you from personal experience that when you have a 4 x 32 GB volume (as above) which you do need to split up further, then this does become a bit of a problem. In the case of a 'shared system disk', often you don't have the option to use any additional 'FDISK' style slices as they have already all been used by other OS's. Cheers, -- Brendon Meyer (Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com) PT Mineserve International / PT Freeport Indonesia / Freeport McMoran Timika, Tembagapura, Jakarta, Singapore, Cairns, New Orleans --------------05EC013FE31FB7BB9593D362 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg Lehey wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 October 1999 at 21:05:04 -0600, Kenneth D. Merry wrote:
> Don wrote...
>>> Actually, it's technically 8 partitions, a-h, but c is "special", and
>>> shouldn't normally be used.
>> Correct C represents the entire disk.
>>
>>> This is a disklabel limitation, not a filesystem limitation.  I believe
>>> that Solaris x86 may be able to do 16 partitions (or so a guy at Sun told
>>> me).
>>
>> I will have to check this out. Thanks for the info. Is there any reason
>> that disklabel has this limit?
>
> It has been that way for a long time.  I'm not sure why the limit is 8, but
> it is.  (Someone might know.  I suspect it was just an arbitrary value
> chosen a long time ago.)  Changing it might break backwards compatibility,
> though.

There was some discussion about increasing it at one point.  But as
you say, it would probably confuse some programs, and I personally
don't see any need.


Ok this is really starting to get off topic on the point of the original thread but I would like to make a comment though.

While I agree that expanding the current disklabel may break some existing stuff, I do beg to disagree about the need (this is an opinion so take it with the appropriate grain of salt).

There are two situations where you can quite easily 'run out' of partitions.
1.  Physically large individual data volumes.  Example is a DPT RAID configuration of a 4 x 32 GB disk RAID 5 array which then presents the resultant RAID 5 disk array to the system as an individual 96 GB drive.
2.  System disk with more than 1 'DOS' style partition already in use (example: DOS/95/98 + BSD + LINUX).

With individually large data volumes the 'sting' is somewhat reduce by the judicious use of FDISK slices, but it is not removed entirely.  With most servers having individual volumes <60Gb this scheme generally works reasonable well but I can tell you from personal experience that when you have a 4 x 32 GB volume (as above) which you do need to split up further, then this does become a bit of a problem.

In the case of a 'shared system disk', often you don't have the option to use any additional 'FDISK' style slices as they have already all been used by other OS's.
 

Cheers,
  

-- 
Brendon Meyer
(Brendon_Meyer@fmi.com)
PT Mineserve International / PT Freeport Indonesia / Freeport McMoran
Timika, Tembagapura, Jakarta, Singapore, Cairns, New Orleans
  --------------05EC013FE31FB7BB9593D362-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Oct 29 23:21:51 1999 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 F3BF414F66 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 23:21:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from p148-ts5.syd2.zeta.org.au (beefcake.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.12]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA29793; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:22:52 +1000 Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:18:12 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@alphplex.bde.org To: Brendon Meyer Cc: Greg Lehey , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Journaling In-Reply-To: <381A18BB.48C2F4E0@fmi.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 > There are two situations where you can quite easily 'run out' of partitions. > 1. Physically large individual data volumes. Example is a DPT RAID > configuration of a 4 x 32 GB disk RAID 5 array which then presents the resultant > RAID 5 disk array to the system as an individual 96 GB drive. > 2. System disk with more than 1 'DOS' style partition already in use (example: > DOS/95/98 + BSD + LINUX). > > With individually large data volumes the 'sting' is somewhat reduce by the > judicious use of FDISK slices, but it is not removed entirely. With most > servers having individual volumes <60Gb this scheme generally works reasonable > well but I can tell you from personal experience that when you have a 4 x 32 GB > volume (as above) which you do need to split up further, then this does become a > bit of a problem. > > In the case of a 'shared system disk', often you don't have the option to use > any additional 'FDISK' style slices as they have already all been used by other > OS's. The supply of 'FDISK' style slices is essentially unlimited. I believe the limit is 2G or 4G slices for the 'FDISK' (extended) data structure. FreeBSD drivers only support the first 30 and FreeBSD fdisk only supports the first 4. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 8:31:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from hermes.mixx.net (hermes.mixx.net [194.152.58.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94BA41511C for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 08:19:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from graichen@innominate.de) Received: from innominate.de (gatekeeper.innominate.de [212.5.16.129]) by hermes.mixx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA02422 for ; Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:30:41 +0200 Received: (qmail 14076 invoked from network); 24 Oct 1999 08:30:30 -0000 Received: from piano.innominate.local (192.168.0.213) by lingo01.innominate.local with SMTP; 24 Oct 1999 08:30:30 -0000 Received: from localhost (graichen@localhost) by piano.innominate.local (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA05434; Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:30:30 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from graichen@innominate.de) X-Authentication-Warning: piano.innominate.local: graichen owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:30:30 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Graichen X-Sender: graichen@piano.innominate.local To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: journaling UFS and LFS 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 is anybody working on adding journaling to the (Free)BSD ufs - or are there any docs in that direction avalibale - any papers or so ? how much harder this is getting due to the complex FreeBSD vm/buffercache and soft updates ? - is anybody intereseted in starting to work on this ? and the next question: now that LFS starts to get usable in NetBSD - has anybody started to look at getting it working again in FreeBSD too (maybe matt ?) or has it on the TODO list for the next months or anything similar ? - anybody with some skills willing to to start working on this ? - just some words about the state in NetBSD (according to my experiments :-): they have it working so far - mostly stable with some minor problems still and also the fsck_lfs is at least able to check the lfs filesystem read only. i think it is a very important point to get this working in FreeBSD due to too long fsck times at bootup getting more and more a killer argument against FreeBSD in serious use with growing filesystem sizes - linux now has somekind of beta quality journaling for ext2 working now btw. t -- graichen@innominate.de innominate AG networking people fon: +49.30.308806-13 fax: -77 web: http://innominate.de pgp: /pgp/tg To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 9:16: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4951507D; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:15:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id MAA43646; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 12:17:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 12:17:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Thomas Graichen Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS 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 > is anybody working on adding journaling to the (Free)BSD ufs - or > are there any docs in that direction avalibale - any papers or > so ? how much harder this is getting due to the complex > FreeBSD vm/buffercache and soft updates ? - is > anybody intereseted in starting to work on > this ? This is exactly the project which was just starting to be discussed on freebsd-fs. There are several people who would love to work on this and as long as the FreeBSD community is going to support. If this project is going to be supported then it will be done. Softupdates is definitely a viable solution however it does not address several issues and the license is not a BSD license so it makes me uncomfortable. > and the next question: now that LFS starts to get usable in NetBSD > - has anybody started to look at getting it working again in > FreeBSD too (maybe matt ?) or has it on the TODO list LFS is being considered as a starting point for this project. The goal is to build an extensible file system with features such as the ability to grow and shrink partitions, acl's journaling etc. XFS is also being considered as a feature reference. > i think it is a very important point to get this working in FreeBSD > due to too long fsck times at bootup getting more and more a > killer argument against FreeBSD in serious use with > growing filesystem sizes Absolutely. >- linux now has somekind > of beta quality journaling for ext2 working now > btw. No comment :) -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 10:53: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from bachue.usc.unal.edu.co (bachue.usc.unal.edu.co [168.176.3.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B11C14A26 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 10:52:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co) Received: from bachue.usc.unal.edu.co ([168.176.3.36]) by bachue.usc.unal.edu.co (Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with ESMTP id AAA3D26 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 12:52:26 -0400 Message-ID: <381B2FE7.AF8FA527@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 12:50:31 -0500 From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Organization: Universidad Nacional de Colombia X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.3-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: it,es-CO MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org (Trimmed a bit the CC list) Don wrote: > ... > > Softupdates is definitely a viable solution however it does not address > several issues and the license is not a BSD license so it makes me > uncomfortable. > The links to CFFS that I posted on -arch show some performance improvements in the Exokernel and in OpenBSD-CFFS against the stock FreeBSD-FFS; it's an interesting alternative. > LFS is being considered as a starting point for this project. The goal is > to build an extensible file system with features such as the ability to > grow and shrink partitions, acl's journaling etc. > Margo Selzer's papers are an important reference: http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~margo/papers/ I recall the sources also carry a large TODO list. > XFS is also being considered as a feature reference. > I understand XFS is quite big, it not used by SGI for their distribution media (I understand they use a modified UFS) and it will take quite some time to port to linux, so I think "feature reference" is the correct approach to it. cheers, Pedro. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 13: 5:57 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4491E14BF1 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 13:05:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA79155; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 13:05:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Thomas Graichen Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 24 Oct 1999 10:30:30 +0200." Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 13:05:41 -0700 Message-ID: <79151.941313941@localhost> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [directed just to -fs; no need to cross post] > is anybody working on adding journaling to the (Free)BSD ufs Perhaps only Kirk McKusick, but he's doing it at his own pace and in his all-too-limited time so there's no telling when he'll start bringing some of his UFS snapshot stuff in. > are there any docs in that direction avalibale - any papers or > so ? Yes. Your challenge: Find them. :) Looking through past USENIX presentations, assuming that they're archived anywhere, would be a good start. > and the next question: now that LFS starts to get usable in NetBSD > - has anybody started to look at getting it working again in > FreeBSD too (maybe matt ?) or has it on the TODO list > for the next months or anything similar ? It's been on the TODO list for 4 years or more. I think what it needs at this point is someone with both the time and skill to tackle it. I don't know of anyone who meets both those criteria right now. Do you? :) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 14:55:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from kronos.alcnet.com (kronos.alcnet.com [63.69.28.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C5514C2F for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:54:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kbyanc@posi.net) X-Provider: ALC Communications, Inc. http://www.alcnet.com/ Received: from localhost (kbyanc@localhost) by kronos.alcnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/antispam) with ESMTP id RAA69835 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:54:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:54:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Kelly Yancey X-Sender: kbyanc@kronos.alcnet.com To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Journaling 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 > > It has been that way for a long time. I'm not sure why the limit is > > 8, but it is. (Someone might know. I suspect it was just an > > arbitrary value chosen a long time ago.) Changing it might break > > backwards compatibility, though. > > NetBSD currently supports 16.Yes, it > breaks backward compatability. > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org Slightly off topic (as if the topic were about journalling anymore in this thread anyway :) )... From my perusal of the code, it looks as if the NetBSD change from 386BSD's partition ID of 165 (which we still use) to 169 is unrelated to the change to 16 partitions. Actually, I can't find where it is useful at all; I would have assumed that if they were going to break backward-compatibility by going to 16 partitions, switching MBR partition IDs at the same time would be logical. Does anyone here know the reasoning between switching MBR partition IDs? Just curious, Kelly -- Kelly Yancey - kbyanc@posi.net - Richmond, VA Director of Technical Services, ALC Communications http://www.alcnet.com/ Maintainer, BSD Driver Database http://www.posi.net/freebsd/drivers/ Coordinator, Team FreeBSD http://www.posi.net/freebsd/Team-FreeBSD/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 15:35:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mailext04.compaq.com (mailext04.compaq.com [207.18.199.42]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03A615195 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:34:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from song@zk3.dec.com) Received: from mailint02.im.hou.compaq.com (mailint02.compaq.com [207.18.199.35]) by mailext04.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76871104B9F; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:34:57 -0500 (CDT) Received: by mailint02.im.hou.compaq.com (Postfix, from userid 12345) id 1FD31BC4C5; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:34:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from iota.zk3.dec.com (iota.zk3.dec.com [16.140.32.65]) by mailint02.im.hou.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACAA9B2A42; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:34:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from zk3.dec.com by iota.zk3.dec.com (8.7.6/UNX 1.7/1.1.20.3/24Apr98-0811AM) id SAA0000003455; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:34:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <381B728F.82963E1A@zk3.dec.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:34:55 -0400 From: Chang Song Organization: Compaq Computer Corp. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; OSF1 V5.0 alpha) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Don Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Don wrote: > > > is anybody working on adding journaling to the (Free)BSD ufs - or > > are there any docs in that direction avalibale - any papers or > > so ? how much harder this is getting due to the complex > > FreeBSD vm/buffercache and soft updates ? - is > > anybody intereseted in starting to work on > > this ? > This is exactly the project which was just starting to be discussed on > freebsd-fs. There are several people who would love to work on this and as > long as the FreeBSD community is going to support. If this project is > going to be supported then it will be done. > > Softupdates is definitely a viable solution however it does not address > several issues and the license is not a BSD license so it makes me > uncomfortable. Could you let me know what SoftUpdate does not address? Thank you. Is jornaling only solution to removal of fsck at boot time? Softupdate not only address required boot time fsck on crash and but also addresses tighter consistency of UFS. -- Chang Song (chang-hyeon.song@digital.com) Work: (603) 884-0799 Compaq Computer Corp.,ZKO3-3/U14 Home: (603) 437-5088 110 Spitbrook Rd., Nashua, NH 03062 Cell: (603) 930-5088 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "A distributed system is one in which I cannot get something done because a machine I've never heard of is down." --Leslie Lamport To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 15:41:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70DAD14D7D for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:41:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA44033; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:42:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:42:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Chang Song Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS In-Reply-To: <381B728F.82963E1A@zk3.dec.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 > Could you let me know what SoftUpdate does not address? > Thank you. Growing and shriking the file system, access control lists, the softupdates license issue, and the ability ot easily extend the capabilites of the file system without having to rewrite utilities such as fsck. > Is jornaling only solution to removal of fsck at boot time? > Softupdate not only address required boot time fsck on crash and but also > addresses tighter consistency of UFS. You want to avoid a UFS fsck at boot time. fsck for lfs or softupdates is very fast as opposed to fsck'ing a large UFS partition. -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 15:51:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F7E714D7D for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:51:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA44049; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:51:32 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:51:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Chang Song Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS 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 > Growing and shriking the file system, access control lists, the > softupdates license issue, and the ability ot easily extend the > capabilites of the file system without having to rewrite utilities such as > fsck. To clarify: A journaled file system will not address any of these issues in and of itself. However, writing a new journaled file system will allow use to address all of these issues more easily than ripping apart UFS (IMHO). Having a journaled file system has another benefit and that is market recognition. The corporate world will be far more likely to embrace FreeBSD if it has a journaled file system than if it has softupdates. While I think this is a silly reason, it will make a difference. Trying to explain to a corporate IT manager that softupdates "is as good as or better than a journaled file system" wont fly. -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 15:54:31 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BDC2151A8 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:54:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA44060 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:56:24 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:56:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Features of a journaled file system 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 What are the features people would like to see in a new FreeBSD file system? Some of the ones I have heard listed are: 1. Ability to grow a FS 2. Ability to shrink a FS 3. Acess control lists on files and file systems 4. Extensibility. (The ability to easily add new features to the filesystem without having to rewrite utilities such as fsck) What else should we be considering? (Obviously any file system that would be written would have to be stable, fast and efficient) Should the file system use b-trees? What other technologies should such a file system make use of? -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 16: 4:15 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [63.67.141.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F6114BF2 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:03:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scanner@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (scanner@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29919; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:02:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:02:15 -0400 (EDT) From: To: Chang Song Cc: Don , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS In-Reply-To: <381B728F.82963E1A@zk3.dec.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 Sat, 30 Oct 1999, Chang Song wrote: > > Softupdates is definitely a viable solution however it does not address > > several issues and the license is not a BSD license so it makes me AFAIK, the license will *eventually* be a BSD one. But kirk HAS to make a living like the rest of us and he needs to to get the commericla players to pay for his time and effort. And there is nothing wrong with that. But as stated I believe he has always intended to make it licensed under a BSD-L but has to recoup his time and effort first. So I think this is a non issue. > Is jornaling only solution to removal of fsck at boot time? Again I *think* another of kirk's long term goals is to make softupdates FSCK'less. And just get rid of fsck all together. But Im not certain about this one. Im sure someone will correct me if im wrong. Having said that a Journaled FS would be cool. Just another feature we have to sell. And under a BSD license. There are only a few things I think BSD could use personally. Threads, better SMP, NFS that is less sucky but matt has done a GREAT job fixing it up so far, and way off on a tangent in another universe, a BSD-L compiler instead of gcc. But thats living in lala land. Chris -- "I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like most of us have. And you have to explain why you were mad, even if you're not mad." -PF DsoTM ===================================| Open Systems FreeBSD Consulting. FreeBSD 3.3 is available now! | Yahoo Messenger ID: opsys_98 -----------------------------------| 1402 N. Washington, Wellington, KS 67152 FreeBSD: The power to serve! | E-Mail: scanner@jurai.net http://www.freebsd.org | Consulting, Network Engineering, Security ===================================| http://open-systems.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 16:12:46 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D559914D2B for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:12:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id TAA44092; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:12:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:12:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: scanner@jurai.net Cc: Chang Song , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS 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 > AFAIK, the license will *eventually* be a BSD one. I know this is the intent but it doesn't help now. Also most of the large players already have at the very least a logged file system so who will this be sold to? > Again I *think* another of kirk's long term goals is to make > softupdates FSCK'less. And just get rid of fsck all together. But Im not > certain about this one. Im sure someone will correct me if im wrong. That is one of the goals. However, Kirk is very busy and this could take forever to implement if we all leave it to Kirk. > Having said that a Journaled FS would be cool. Just another feature we > have to sell. And under a BSD license. There are only a few things I think > BSD could use personally. Threads, better SMP, NFS that is less sucky but > matt has done a GREAT job fixing it up so far, and way off on a tangent in > another universe, a BSD-L compiler instead of gcc. But thats living in > lala land. This is my list as well. Threads (and with it a threaded tcp stack), smoother SMP (coming), nfs (as you said well on its way) and a bsd compiler. The only thing I would add to this is a more fully featured vinum (Look vinum rocks. There is no question about that. There are just a few more features that would be nice to have and those are already listed on the vinum web pages), and a robust, BSD licensed, extensible ha solution. -don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 16:33:24 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [209.98.143.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08FBC151AD for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:33:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nectar@nectar.com) Received: from bone.nectar.com (bone.nectar.com [10.0.0.105]) by gw.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4641BC008; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:31:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: from bone.nectar.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bone.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DB31DA4; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:33:04 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.0 09/18/1999 X-PGP-RSAfprint: 00 F9 E6 A2 C5 4D 0A 76 26 8B 8B 57 73 D0 DE EE X-PGP-RSAkey: http://www.nectar.com/nectar-rsa.txt X-PGP-DSSfprint: AB2F 8D71 A4F4 467D 352E 8A41 5D79 22E4 71A2 8C73 X-PGP-DHfprint: 2D50 12E5 AB38 60BA AF4B 0778 7242 4460 1C32 F6B1 X-PGP-DH-DSSkey: http://www.nectar.com/nectar-dh-dss.txt From: Jacques Vidrine To: Don Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: References: Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:33:03 -0500 Message-Id: <19991030233304.03DB31DA4@bone.nectar.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 30 October 1999 at 18:51, Don wrote: [snip] > Having a journaled file system has another benefit and that is market > recognition. The corporate world will be far more likely to embrace > FreeBSD if it has a journaled file system than if it has softupdates. Huh? Have you actually heard anyone say, ``Well, we were going to use FreeBSD, but darned if we found out at the last minute that it doesn't have a journaled file system. We decided to use KY Brand UNIX instead.'' I think ``far more likely'' is a stretch. > While I think this is a silly reason, it will make a difference. Trying to > explain to a corporate IT manager that softupdates "is as good as or > better than a journaled file system" wont fly. Most corporate IT managers wouldn't know a filesystem if they were bitten by one. -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 16:38:48 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from calis.blacksun.org (Calis.blacksun.org [168.100.186.40]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29B1F151AD for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:38:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.blacksun.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id TAA44139; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:40:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from don@calis.blacksun.org) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:40:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Don To: Jacques Vidrine Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: journaling UFS and LFS In-Reply-To: <19991030233304.03DB31DA4@bone.nectar.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 > Huh? Have you actually heard anyone say, ``Well, we were going to use > FreeBSD, but darned if we found out at the last minute that it doesn't > have a journaled file system. We decided to use KY Brand UNIX > instead.'' Actually yes I have heard this, and quite often. (It is more likely that I suggest FreeBSD and I am asked if it can provide a journaled file system and I am forced to say no) > Most corporate IT managers wouldn't know a filesystem if they were > bitten by one. That is absolutely the case. That is why I can not suggest that softupdates is as good as a journaled file system. The people I deal with at least know the buzzword and they want to make sure that whatever solution they go with will have it. This is getting off topic. What features would you like to see in a new file system. Some suggestions were made. Would you like to add anything to this list? -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 16:41:34 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from frmug.org (frmug-gw.frmug.org [193.56.58.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA8514DE5 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:41:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by frmug.org (8.9.3/frmug-2.5/nospam) with UUCP id BAA06409 for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 01:41:14 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) Received: by keltia.freenix.fr (Postfix, from userid 101) id 4F785878D; Sun, 31 Oct 1999 01:40:32 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 01:40:32 +0200 From: Ollivier Robert To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Features of a journaled file system Message-ID: <19991031014032.A3510@keltia.freenix.fr> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Mutt/1.0pre2i In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT/ELF AMD-K6/200 & 2x PPro/200 SMP Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org According to Don: > Should the file system use b-trees? What other technologies should such a B-trees would help a lot in some cases. UFS performance has always been abyssimal with large directories... -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 4.0-CURRENT #74: Thu Sep 9 00:20:51 CEST 1999 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 16:56:43 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mailext04.compaq.com (mailext04.compaq.com [207.18.199.42]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40BE6155F7 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 16:56:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from song@zk3.dec.com) Received: from mailint12.im.hou.compaq.com (mailint12.compaq.com [207.18.199.190]) by mailext04.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEBA0104B9F; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:56:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: by mailint12.im.hou.compaq.com (Postfix, from userid 12345) id BAB074FB02; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:56:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from iota.zk3.dec.com (iota.zk3.dec.com [16.140.32.65]) by mailint12.im.hou.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CC74C901; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:56:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from zk3.dec.com by iota.zk3.dec.com (8.7.6/UNX 1.7/1.1.20.3/24Apr98-0811AM) id TAA0000010400; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:56:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <381B85AB.68EF4A45@zk3.dec.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 19:56:27 -0400 From: Chang Song Organization: Compaq Computer Corp. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; OSF1 V5.0 alpha) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ollivier Robert Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Features of a journaled file system References: <19991031014032.A3510@keltia.freenix.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Ollivier Robert wrote: > > According to Don: > > Should the file system use b-trees? What other technologies should such a > > B-trees would help a lot in some cases. UFS performance has always been > abyssimal with large directories... I think B+ tree is too complex to maintain and implement. Extendible hashing (GFS uses it) is great compromise. Easier to implement yet competitive or sometime faster than B+ tree. -- Chang Song (chang-hyeon.song@digital.com) Work: (603) 884-0799 Compaq Computer Corp.,ZKO3-3/U14 Home: (603) 437-5088 110 Spitbrook Rd., Nashua, NH 03062 Cell: (603) 930-5088 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "A distributed system is one in which I cannot get something done because a machine I've never heard of is down." --Leslie Lamport To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Oct 30 18:41:36 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from friley-160-236.res.iastate.edu (friley-160-236.res.iastate.edu [129.186.160.236]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B10414E9D for ; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 18:41:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cc@137.org) Received: from ameslab.gov (friley-160-235.res.iastate.edu [129.186.160.235]) by friley-160-236.res.iastate.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B84176; Sat, 30 Oct 1999 20:41:32 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <381B9E4C.1B94BD83@ameslab.gov> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 20:41:32 -0500 From: Chris Csanady X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT i386) X-Accept-Language: en, ru, ja, ko MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Don Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Features of a journaled file system References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Don wrote: > > What are the features people would like to see in a new FreeBSD file > system? Some of the ones I have heard listed are: > 1. Ability to grow a FS > 2. Ability to shrink a FS > 3. Acess control lists on files and file systems > 4. Extensibility. (The ability to easily add new features to the > filesystem without having to rewrite utilities such as fsck) 5. Snapshots > What else should we be considering? > (Obviously any file system that would be written would have to be stable, > fast and efficient) > Should the file system use b-trees? What other technologies should such a > file system make use of? Probably, at least for large directories. Has anyone else looked at reiserfs? It seems like they are doing some good work there. I would encourage you to pester them about the licensing. :) It seems like it would be in everyones best interests if we had a common filesystem. This is a *lot* of work to duplicate, and only lessens portability. This is one of the nicer aspects of the BSD filesystem.. Chris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message