From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 2 16:28:38 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 991BD1065675 for ; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 16:28:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3378FC1F for ; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 16:28:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q52GSZFJ018514; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 18:28:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id q52GSZ8a018511; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 18:28:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 18:28:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Warren Block In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20120531025206.GA11699@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> <20120531170035.GA29456@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> <20120602052537.GA42456@admin.sibptus.tomsk.ru> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]); Sat, 02 Jun 2012 18:28:35 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Victor Sudakov , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 9.0 on SSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 16:28:38 -0000 >> filesystem which resides on the SSD. Is it good, bad or irrelevant for >> the SSD ? > > Mostly irrelevant, I think. I've been using just ordinary soft updates as > there is bug fixing going on with SU+J. fsck on the SSD is very fast anyway, > so SU+J is needed less. And there's a little less writing because there is > no journal. But then, I've left atime on, too. > _______________________________________________ i have FreeBSD 9 and SSD (OCZ Agility 3 "60GB") DO NOT use any kind of journalling - this increase writes and wear, while fsck takes <10 seconds for me. do use -t option for newfs. make sure your FS partition is aligned to 4 kilobytes. All these web advices about aligning to 1MB is classic pure nonsense (most often used NTFS aligns to 4kB anyway). run without swap or make pseudo-dynamic swap with mdconfig ;) My config: 1) no MSDOS partitions (slices). not needed no matter if it is SSD or not. unless you run windoze too. 2) single partition for FreeBSD, SSD are not huge and wasting space for partitions isn't smart. example: # /dev/ada0: 8 partitions: # size offset fstype [fsize bsize bps/cpg] a: 117231408 0 4.2BSD 0 0 0 c: 117231408 0 unused 0 0 # "raw" part, don't edit 3) newfs -m 0 -i 16384 -b 8192 -f 1024 -U -t /dev/ada0a or similar settings. maybe you can run with less inodes (in my case i've got 3.6M inodes). for rare case swapping i do in /etc/rc.local #!/bin/sh echo creating swapfile /bin/rm -f /swapfile.tmp dd if=/dev/zero of=/swapfile.tmp bs=8m seek=1k count=0 /sbin/mdconfig -a -t vnode -u 0 -f /swapfile.tmp || /bin/sh /bin/rm -f /swapfile.tmp /sbin/swapctl -a /dev/md0 and in /etc/rc.shutdown.local #!/bin/sh echo removing swapfile /sbin/swapctl -d /dev/md0 /sbin/mdconfig -d -u 0 this will allocate 8GB file with holes, space would be allocated when actually needed, and deallocated on shutdown.