Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:59:18 -0500 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> To: Doug Poland <doug@polands.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Testing UFS/Snapshots/Quotas on -STABLE Message-ID: <20070313155918.GJ56342@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <58211.69.129.174.18.1173797454.squirrel@email.polands.org> References: <58211.69.129.174.18.1173797454.squirrel@email.polands.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 09:50:54AM -0500 I heard the voice of Doug Poland, and lo! it spake thus: > > In addition, it appears that compiling support for quotas in the > kernel will force the Giant lock on UFS and I want to make sure I > won't have a performance regression on the filesystem. I can tell you that the impact will range from negligable to significant, depending on the particular workload. I have a RELENG_6 box that, for hysterical raisins, has the ports tree on a partition with quotas, and a large 'portsnap update' gets VERY jerky. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070313155918.GJ56342>