From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 9 11:08:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0713616A4DD for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:08:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freminlins@gmail.com) Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.191]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4BE43D46 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 11:08:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freminlins@gmail.com) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g2so142190nfe for ; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 04:08:06 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=OJ+HXbjCSd4u8qpFSJnpZoOLwki/ik8d/wfcgaBpi11HW2mdBej4X1MIm27SyewTGcQ6iqhCaAtOCf1/rSAOzgHAjF3LNSr75DoV8ek/EwuXDFiqMCFRDYIh4OtsWv+QeziBjwXt11LueeAJ3ZhIiK1D2BU6OVmkTjcYVm6/wls= Received: by 10.49.55.13 with SMTP id h13mr1349526nfk; Wed, 09 Aug 2006 04:08:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.48.208.6 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 04:08:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 12:08:06 +0100 From: Freminlins To: "Martin Hepworth" In-Reply-To: <72cf361e0608081151p68feb6b2lf8badd518cf46a9c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <72cf361e0608081151p68feb6b2lf8badd518cf46a9c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Atom Powers , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Large File System? 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: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:08:10 -0000 On 08/08/06, Martin Hepworth wrote: > Softupdates are the FreeBSD equivalent. From my point of view they perform > better than a traditional journaling FS (do a google search for the original > usenix papers on these). > Journalling means not having to fsck the file system in the event of an unclean shutdown. So it's wrong to describe softupdates as equivalent. It's not. I also find they speed up I/O quite alot, esp for fast changing filesystems > like mail spools. > Certainly I have found using softupdates to be considerably faster than without. martin > Frem.