From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Apr  1 22:38:18 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id WAA24419 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 22:38:18 -0800
Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (root@UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id WAA24413 for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sat, 1 Apr 1995 22:38:14 -0800
Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA12450
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Sun, 2 Apr 1995 00:16:56 -0600
Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA23600; 2 Apr 95 00:09:47 CST (Sun)
Received: (from peter@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id AAA23597; Sun, 2 Apr 1995 00:09:46 -0600
From: Peter da Silva <peter@bonkers.taronga.com>
Message-Id: <199504020609.AAA23597@bonkers.taronga.com>
Subject: Re: large filesystems/multiple disks [RAID]
To: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 1995 00:09:45 -0600 (CST)
Cc: PVinci@ix.netcom.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <9504012219.AA11992@cs.weber.edu> from "Terry Lambert" at Apr 1, 95 03:19:27 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 235       
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> It's fragile because you could for instance have four file systems
> with blocks in the same 16M area of a disk.

Um, why would you do that? Doesn't that sort of counter the whole reason
for running file systems over multiple disks?