Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 07 Dec 2000 10:05:23 +0100
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Cc:        A G F Keahan <ak@freenet.co.uk>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Optimal UFS parameters 
Message-ID:  <59715.976179923@critter>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:56:10 PST." <20001207005610.M16205@fw.wintelcom.net> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20001207005610.M16205@fw.wintelcom.net>, Alfred Perlstein writes:

>> So far I don't see any indication here (or elsewhere) that anybody
>> has that grasp.
>> 
>> I guess that is really a testimony to FFS/UFS's qualites...
>> 
>> The main thing is that you significantly reduce your fsck time if
>> you reduce the number of inodes.
>
>Oh, your tunables just reduce the number of inodes?  That may come
>as a suprise to people that are using the larger disks to store
>images and web/ftp stuff.

No they don't, I mainly reduce the number of cylinder-groups.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?59715.976179923>