From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 1 14:33:17 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A810316A417 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 14:33:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Received: from woozle.rinet.ru (woozle.rinet.ru [195.54.192.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F4AE13C45B for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 14:33:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by woozle.rinet.ru (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l81ESSuF048656; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 18:28:28 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from marck@rinet.ru) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 18:28:28 +0400 (MSD) From: Dmitry Morozovsky To: ticso@cicely.de In-Reply-To: <20070901134809.GF54895@cicely12.cicely.de> Message-ID: <20070901182634.A14738@woozle.rinet.ru> References: <20070901074803.GM85633@comp.chem.msu.su> <3842.1188634387@critter.freebsd.dk> <20070901092310.GO85633@comp.chem.msu.su> <20070901093035.GA18069@harmless.hu> <20070901122913.GE54895@cicely12.cicely.de> <20070901165544.H14738@woozle.rinet.ru> <20070901134809.GF54895@cicely12.cicely.de> X-NCC-RegID: ru.rinet X-OpenPGP-Key-ID: 6B691B03 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (woozle.rinet.ru [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:28:28 +0400 (MSD) Cc: Yar Tikhiy , Poul-Henning Kamp , fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New option for newfs(3) to make life with GEOM easier 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: Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:33:17 -0000 On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Bernd Walter wrote: BW> > BW> Sysinstall easily allows you to not partition the last few sectors. BW> > BW> The newfs option is only usefull if you are mirroring at fs level, BW> > BW> which is note quite common for system disks, where you really need BW> > BW> partitions. BW> > BW> > I concur, as all servers (rather entry-level, yeah; and excluding these that BW> > have large storage) we deploy last 2 years have two SATA disks with mirrored BW> > file systems. BW> BW> What is the big win if you mirror all partitions/filesystems and not BW> the whole disk? Time of syncronysation in case of a crash. In our case, usually, large partitions are mostly read and have not to be syncronized. This was originally the recommendation from pjd@ Sincerely, D.Marck [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN] [ FreeBSD committer: marck@FreeBSD.org ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck@rinet.ru *** ------------------------------------------------------------------------