From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Dec 8 11: 9:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8AEB37B405; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:09:29 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.11.6/8.9.1) id fB8J9TB06131; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:09:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:09:29 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200112081909.fB8J9TB06131@apollo.backplane.com> To: "David O'Brien" Cc: Robert Watson , "Louis A. Mamakos" , Sheldon Hearn , Kirk McKusick , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Using a larger block size on large filesystems References: <200112080400.fB8403P00383@apollo.backplane.com> <20011208103405.D11428@dragon.nuxi.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :I know you've mentioned this before. Are there technical reasons behind :this? I believe you mentioned something about the buffer cache? Would :you be willing to add it as an option since so many others seem to want :it? Most of the stuff that winds up in /tmp is garbage. There is no good reason to burden our VM system with unnecessary garbage and I know of no performance issues involved with people using /tmp files that requires MFS or MD. It's an unnecessary waste of memory and an unnecessary burden on our VM system. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message