From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 18 16:30:45 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F6E16A52C for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:30:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@pepcross.com) Received: from smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk (smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk [195.188.213.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3EC613C461 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:30:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@pepcross.com) Received: from [172.23.170.143] (helo=anti-virus02-10) by smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1JR8Tr-0000lI-Pa for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:04:35 +0000 Received: from [82.32.9.178] (helo=pepcross.com) by asmtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1JR8Tr-0001JL-AL for freebsd-fs@freebsd.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:04:35 +0000 Received: by pepcross.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:04:27 +0000 From: "Steve Roome" Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:04:27 +0000 To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20080218160427.GA3700@zebedee.internal.pepcross.com> References: <200802181414.m1IEE8bd075081@drugs.dv.isc.org> <78cb3d3f0802180632u1d38ec67i432052d9c77dd706@mail.gmail.com> <47B9A08F.4080703@samsco.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47B9A08F.4080703@samsco.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Subject: Re: How to take down a system to the point of requiring a newfs with one line of C (userland) X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:30:45 -0000 On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:13:19AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > Adrian Penisoara wrote: >> Hi, >> I would agree with Mark and Jim, this is a serious issue for enterprise >> servers. Yet another example where I would have wanted to see a more >> supportive response from the FreeBSD project members, like Robert Watson >> just did. This would benefit keeping a good relation with the business >> users. > > The responses from Dag-Erling was pretty much what I'd expect to see on > a linux mailing list. Hopefully this filesystem issue gets some > attention. Scott... err... so that's praise for des ? ;) Still, instead of being too disctracted by "social issues". Does anyone know if creating lots of files at the root breaks UFS2 without softupdates enabled and does this same thing affect any other filesystems ? As to the social bit... We ought to have something in the list faq and charter about how you should expect at least one "odd" comment from someone every time you post to the list. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/mailing-list-faq/ Besides, this is all "publicity" (as in, "no such thing as bad publicity") for the original issue and the more noise the more folks will see it and so on. Maybe des just did FreeBSD a huge favour by making more people follow the list, worry about it, test it and be sure it's fixed in the future ? Steve Roome P.S. Personally I thought des' response was hilarious! But I say that with the greatest amount of respect for the original posters brilliant problem description.