From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 11 19:59:17 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA12676 for current-outgoing; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:59:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA12671 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:59:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from dyson.iquest.net ([198.70.144.127]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id TAA29324 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 19:59:11 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.2/8.6.9) id WAA03769; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 22:53:50 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" Message-Id: <199611120353.WAA03769@dyson.iquest.net> Subject: Re: ufs is too slow? To: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr (Ollivier Robert) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 22:53:50 -0500 (EST) Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Ollivier Robert" at Nov 11, 96 07:26:15 pm Reply-To: dyson@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > 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. > The LFS that we have had in our tree never really worked correctly, and wasn't very robust. However, it doesn't excuse me missing my target for getting it fixed. I did ask Margo for help with her latest sources, but got no response, other than an initial ack. Given that, I intend to fully integrate it with our merged VM/Buffer cache, hopefully making progress like getting rid of locked buffers, etc... John