Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 13:38:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Jason Arnaute <non_secure@yahoo.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Stress testing the UFS2 filesystem Message-ID: <20060520203851.80730.qmail@web50909.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <446F7860.4060705@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> wrote: > Yes, you have a point that snapshots have been > broken in > the past. A lot of work has been done recently to > fix > them, as well as quotas. Your trollish digs only > disrespect > all the work being done, and they are not welcome > here. If I were complaining about some new feature, some advanced new addition to FreeBSD, then I would have no place here. Setbacks and failures are part of any project like this. No arguments there. But I am not complaining about some new feature, or some cutting edge addition. I am complaining that a bedrock function of the filesystem that has existed in UNIX and UNIX-like OS's for _decades_ now no longer functions in FreeBSD (quotas). I am complaining about default functionality (snapshots) that was forced down the throats of everyone (in the form of bg_fsck) over two years ago that has _never worked_, and that 90% of users have no idea of its presence or its ramifications. Go ask Joe sysadmin who just installed FreeBSD 6.1 as his companies mailserver if he realizes what will happen if he BG fscks a filesystem that has been filled to capacity. Oh, and yes, I do in fact have a patch for the quota issues - it's called FreeBSD 4.x. This ridicule is _well deserved_. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060520203851.80730.qmail>