Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 12:29:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com> To: peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/newfs newfs.8 newfs.c Message-ID: <200110261630.f9QGTwa79290@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <20011026153413.Z75481@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26 Oct, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 07:42:32PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: >>"-c" was a no-brainer as noone has ever argued that a low "-c" was >>prefered (that I've seen). > > I can think of one case: For small filesystems, I often reduce "-c" to > ensure that there are at least 2 cylinder groups (in case one > superblock gets corrupted). Where there are only 2-3 CG's, I might > juggle "-c" and the slice size to make the last CG the same size as > the other CGs. Why don't we make newfs apply this (and/or similar) heuristics by default -- when no options are specified? -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110261630.f9QGTwa79290>