From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Jul 18 00:21:47 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA28540 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 00:21:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [195.8.133.1] (may be forged)) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA28534 for ; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 00:21:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA01847; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 09:18:23 +0200 (CEST) To: "Alton, Matthew" cc: "'FreeBSD-fs@FreeBSD.ORG'" Subject: Re: Dual optimized disks In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 17 Jul 1998 22:14:21 BST." <31B3F0BF1C40D11192A700805FD48BF901776615@STLABCEXG011> Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 09:18:20 +0200 Message-ID: <1845.900746300@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message <31B3F0BF1C40D11192A700805FD48BF901776615@STLABCEXG011>, "Alton, Mat thew" writes: >I am working up a hare-brained crackpot FS scheme which >uses 2 disks - one is read optimized and the other is write >optimized but are logically identical. Is this a good idea? s/2/N/ and it sounds like LFS with each segment on a separate disk, which performance wise can be a good idea. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message