From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 11 12:51:45 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA08772 for current-outgoing; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 12:51:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mexico.brainstorm.eu.org (root@mexico.brainstorm.fr [193.56.58.253]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA08749 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 12:51:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from brasil.brainstorm.eu.org (brasil.brainstorm.fr [193.56.58.33]) by mexico.brainstorm.eu.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA00797 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 21:50:44 +0100 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by brasil.brainstorm.eu.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) with UUCP id VAA05740 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 21:49:56 +0100 Received: (from roberto@localhost) by keltia.freenix.fr (8.8.2/keltia-uucp-2.9) id TAA24352; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:26:16 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:26:15 +0100 From: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ufs is too slow? References: <199611111704.MAA12463@fnur.3skel.com> X-Mailer: Mutt 0.50.04 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT ctm#2686 In-Reply-To: <199611111704.MAA12463@fnur.3skel.com>; from Dan Janowski on Nov 11, 1996 12:04:35 -0500 Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk According to Dan Janowski: > At one point I had inquired about lfs (log file system), in > part because of my experience with xfs (SGI's). Although lfs > is not xfs, they are both better performers than ufs/ffs (which Xfs is pretty fragile from what I've heard. > are both REALLY old, I think ufs dates from the 50's and ffs > from the 70's). They appeared in 1983 in a paper that you'll find in /usr/src/share/doc/papers/smm/05.fastfs. > Margo Seltzer, who was a principle for lfs. The apparent > primary reason why lfs does not run here is that lfs does some > wierd stuff with the ATT buffer code that is missing in > 4.4-lite. I was not able to get a synopsis of what or how to > get around it, but it didn't sound like lfs was broken, it's > just missing some wheels. Not exactly. It is broken in FreeBSD since the VM/Buffer cache merge and it lacks some features like fsck. John Dyson said he was working on it and hoped to have it fixed for 2.2. Now maybe 3.0. -- Ollivier ROBERT -=- The daemon is FREE! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 3.0-CURRENT #28: Sun Nov 10 13:37:41 MET 1996