From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Mar 22 16:14:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from earth.backplane.com (earth-nat-cw.backplane.com [208.161.114.67]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF7E37B71A; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:14:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@earth.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by earth.backplane.com (8.11.2/8.9.3) id f2N0EBC61507; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:14:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:14:11 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Dillon Message-Id: <200103230014.f2N0EBC61507@earth.backplane.com> To: "Michael C . Wu" Cc: fs@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tuning a VERY heavily (30.0) loaded s cerver References: <200103211114.f2LBE0h57371@mobile.wemm.org> <20010321120620.A932@peorth.iteration.net> <200103211817.f2LIHR416007@earth.backplane.com> <20010321102836.N12319@fw.wintelcom.net> <200103211907.f2LJ7cp17933@earth.backplane.com> <20010322142852.A19619@peorth.iteration.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :(Why is vfs.vmiodirenable=1 not enabled by default?) : The only reason it isn't enabled by default is some unresolved filesystem corruption that occurs very rarely (with or without it) that Kirk and I are still trying to nail down. I want to get that figured out first. It is true that some people have brought up memory use issues, but I don't consider memory use to really be that much of an issue. This is a cache, after all, so the blocks can be reused at just about any time. And directory blocks do not get cached well at all with vmiodirenable turned off. So the net result should be an increase in performance even on low-memory boxes. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message