Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 12:39:54 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: Michael Hamburg <hamburg@fas.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: fsck in -current Message-ID: <20040516173954.GB80376@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <40A7A143.7070907@freebsd.org> References: <20040515220258.H920@ganymede.hub.org> <D3AE316C-A6D9-11D8-89DA-0003939A19AA@fas.harvard.edu> <20040515233728.Q30269@ganymede.hub.org> <FA17DF77-A6FB-11D8-89DA-0003939A19AA@fas.harvard.edu> <20040516163039.GE29158@dan.emsphone.com> <40A79A54.3090703@freebsd.org> <20040516170441.GA80376@dan.emsphone.com> <40A7A143.7070907@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (May 16), Scott Long said: > Dan Nelson wrote: > >In the last episode (May 16), Scott Long said: > > > >>Actually, bgfsck unconditionally inserts a delay into every 8th i/o > >>operation to try to keep from saturating the disks. Unfortunately > >>this isn't terribly sophisticated and it results in bgfsck taking > >>an eternity whether the system is idle, loaded, or reniced. > > > >See http://dan.allantgroup.com/FreeBSD/fsck_ffs.diff for a patch > >that removes the delay if it's at the minimum value, and more fairly > >calculates disk wait time. This cuts bgfsck time from ~4 hours to > >20 minutes on my 36gb /usr. > > Looks like a reasonable fix. Do you want it reviewed and committed? Sure. I don't remember why I bumped up the max wait time to 2.5 sec, though. That's probably too long. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040516173954.GB80376>