Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 08:31:16 -0600 (CST) From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> To: hgoldste@bbs.mpcs.com Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, terry@lambert.org Subject: Re: ufs is too slow? Message-ID: <199611131431.IAA23176@brasil.moneng.mei.com> In-Reply-To: <199611131410.JAA30752@bbs.mpcs.com> from "Howard Goldstein" at Nov 13, 96 09:10:59 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In article <199611120120.SAA19129@phaeton.artisoft.com>, Terry Lambert wrote: > : Again, news articles are created, written only once, and not updated; > : there's really no reason to get more complex on a "newsfs" than doing > : what you can to speed up indexing, etc.. And that can be just as easily > : laid on *top* of *any* FS -- after all, the indices won't change > : significantly either, if they have correct organizing principles, since > : the data they refer to is invariant until expiration or creation. > > The only catch is with regard to overview files, one per newsgroup, to > which per-article header data are appended. Whether or not it's a > large catch in the discussion about what I call an "expfs", an > expendable filesystem with a care-less (careless) attitude towards > integrity, I do not know. Who is saying that you need to use the same type of filesystem to store the overview files? I see no reason to switch from FFS for those, or for /usr/local, /var, etc. ... JG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611131431.IAA23176>