Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 23:54:36 +0100 From: Stefan Esser <se@mi.uni-koeln.de> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Stefan Esser <se@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: boot single with new loader? Message-ID: <19990116235436.B382@dialup124.mi.uni-koeln.de> In-Reply-To: <19990111231143.A83935@keltia.freenix.fr>; from Ollivier Robert on Mon, Jan 11, 1999 at 11:11:43PM %2B0100 References: <009c01be3b2c$92e60320$236319ac@w142844.carlson.com> <19990111231143.A83935@keltia.freenix.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1999-01-11 23:11 +0100, Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> wrote: > According to Thomas T. Veldhouse: > > the root slice as sync. I figured it was safer, and it wasn't that > > important to me to have that particular slice on softupdates anyway. > > Beware of something that can be deadly for a "make installworld". When > using SU, space freed by "rm" takes a bit more time to be taken into account > and you can fill "/" or "/usr" up because the space recovered by "install" > is not yet freed. > > It happened to me a few times for "/usr" and one time for "/". Having > "/bin/sh" with a 0-byte size is not good for booting :-) Yes, that forced me to turn off soft-updates for the / file system. I was lucky not to have tried rebooting the system, since then there would not have been a chance to invoke a shell (and lots of other binaries that had not made it to /bin and /sbin) from within /usr/obj ! I found that I need 3 times the size of the binaries in / during the "make install" phase, if softupdates is enabled! With more than 11MB in /bin and /sbin, I need some 20MB of free space in /, or the file system will fill up and files will be missing ! I warned about this, a few months ago, after it first hit me. Can't we work around this, for example by waking up the update daemon when the disk is nearly full ? This may call degradation of performance, but will help avoid spurious disk full situations on file systems that appear to have lots (possibly tens) of MB of free space, when you look at them a minute later ... Having a process sleep for some fraction of a second (or possibly more) in a disk full situation, when in fact many blocks have been freed and are awaiting a soft-updates commit to disk, may also be better than to have the processes fail! Regards, STefan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990116235436.B382>