Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:50:56 -0500 (CDT) From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net> Cc: Ben Rosengart <ben@skunk.org>, Chuck Youse <cyouse@paradox.nexuslabs.com>, Ilia Chipitsine <ilia@cgilh.chel.su>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: why FFS is THAT slower than EXT2 ? Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96.991027114004.66448B-100000@shell-1.enteract.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910271229520.29073-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Chuck Robey wrote: > > > > Read the post again -- they were using soft updates. > > Why is that important? Soft updates is still far better than an async > filesystem. Have you lost files in panics? I haven't. > Soft updates should get you most of the speed that async updates do. I have lost cylinder groups in panics on systems with soft-updates. (I was using a very buggy kernel module, so things were *hosed*). The original poster hasn't really provided enough information to know what is going on, and what the performance problem is. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96.991027114004.66448B-100000>