From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Apr 3 21:17:51 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id VAA25026 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 21:17:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA25021 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 21:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by who.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.11) with ESMTP id VAA16011 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 21:17:04 -0800 Received: from msmith@localhost by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id PAA25004; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 15:07:10 +0930 From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199604040537.PAA25004@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: sysinstall's newfs To: s_koyin@eduserv.its.unimelb.EDU.AU (HMG coA reductase) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 15:07:09 +0930 (CST) Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199604040305.NAA10219@eduserv.its.unimelb.EDU.AU> from "HMG coA reductase" at Apr 4, 96 01:05:04 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk HMG coA reductase stands accused of saying: > > G'day all. I have some observations regarding the state of the filesystem > after installing a new copy of FreeBSD. Apparently the sysinstall defaults > for newfs are grossly inappropriate and lead to a badly optimised file- > system. Actually, the opposite is the case. The code that was developed to try to squeeze the last byte per second out of the old RA-8x disks is being defeated in order to deal with newer disk technology. > Notice that the `a' partition has a physical size of 49152, but the file- > system only uses 48124 blocks(sectors). The `e' partition is worse, with > only 170512 out of 173590 being used. Trauma! 513K lost on your root filesystem and a shocking 1539K on your 'e' partition. Such sloppiness. 8) > Some note worthy points are: > 1. Absence of rotational position table > 2. ntrak value of 1, which should be equal to the no. of heads, or > tracks per cylinder. Both meaningless for ZBR disks. > 3. nsect == npsect == spc which does not tally with the disklabel values. Hmm? nsect == spc would imply cyl == 1, which isn't the caset. > I'm wondering if anyone has noticed such things, and how you've handled it. They're intentionally like that to defeat the old non-optimisations. Nothing is wrong, or requires fixing. > iVan NgeOw -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[