Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 18:10:36 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> Cc: James Housley <jim@thehousleys.net>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Inherate nodump cause significant slow down of dump Message-ID: <20010316181036.H9267@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20010317011847.EA9083E1E@bazooka.unixfreak.org>; from dima@unixfreak.org on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 05:18:47PM -0800 References: <3AB2B8BA.29C5E58E@thehousleys.net> <20010317011847.EA9083E1E@bazooka.unixfreak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 05:18:47PM -0800, Dima Dorfman wrote:
> I'm not terribly opposed to this, but OTOH I don't see why it's
> necessary.
Agreed.
> The slowdown only occurs if you set nodump on a directory.
..snip..
> In other words, the only thing that's broken is the new feature.
I guess I need to read the report again. I don't see where there is a
bug. There is a great slowdown in operating time -- ie a performance
nit, but no bug. But as you said, if you want -h; you have to spend the
time processing.
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010316181036.H9267>