Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 15:52:01 -0500 From: Michael Powell <nightrecon@hotmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More On Samba And Softupdates Message-ID: <icc0la$562$1@dough.gmane.org> References: <4CE94F25.3000609@tundraware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Tim Daneliuk wrote: > The other day I mentioned I had a problem with a Samba-shared drive that > was just installed blowing up. When I rebuilt it, I forgot to enable > softupdates but the drive seems to be working flawlessly. I understand > it is possible to do this after-the-fact with tunefs. Some questions: > > Do I have to unmount the drive to do it? > What benefit will I get if I turn on softupdates? > > This drive is being used as a backup drive for all the workstations on > this particular network, and "reliable" is much more important than " > slightly faster". As per man tunefs: "The tunefs utility cannot be run on an active file system. To change an active file system, it must be downgraded to read-only or unmounted." The benefit is not just speed, but better concurrent multi-user throughput. Operations which would block other I/O "finish" sooner so the next task can begin without waiting. I actually run mine with aio_load="YES" in loader.conf in conjunction with the following in smb.conf: aio read size = 16384 aio write size = 16384 aio write behind = true block size = 16384 use sendfile = Yes Minor performance tweaks aside, should you continue to see the error(s) described in the other mail I sincerely suspect softupdates is not the culprit. -Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?icc0la$562$1>