Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:11:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Juri Mianovich <juri_mian@yahoo.com> To: Dag-Erling "Sm�rgrav" <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: forcing a permanent "time" optimization with tunefs ? Message-ID: <588014.62881.qm@web45607.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <868x7tys87.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Dag-Erling Sm�rgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
> BTW, explain this: if you don't care about
> conserving space, why did you
> lower minfree in the first place?
As per the original thread, I _did_ care about
conserving space, and in fact would _very much like_
to optimize for space.
However, it turns out that the 6.2-RELEASE version of
aac combined with a adaptec 2820sa is overwhelmed by
the combination of:
- 0% minfree
- quotas
- a few rsync processes
So I _immediately_ tuned it right back to 1% minfree
where it had been for 200+ days.
Oops - it turns out that going downwards in minfree is
a one-way operation, in some aspects - and going back
to 1% did not reduce the stress on the controller.
So what I needed very desperately was to find a way to
force it to optimize for time, and not for space, even
though I had not yet freed up enough bytes to move all
the way to 6% minfree.
Days later, I was able to move to 6% minfree, and my
immediate problems are over.
So there's your answer. It turns out that I _did_
have a reason to quickly force a filesystem into
"time" optimized, even though its not the best thing
overall.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?588014.62881.qm>