Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:00:43 +0200 From: Emanuel Strobl <Emanuel.strobl@gmx.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: drvince@anonymnet.net, Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Subject: Re: nullfs fixed ? (was: More into /etc/rc.d/jail) Message-ID: <200508100000.53489@harrymail> In-Reply-To: <20050809214748.GA45385@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <N1-uLBXxM-zn8@Safe-mail.net> <200508092335.21889@harrymail> <20050809214748.GA45385@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart3999494.O1Stzz2vam Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Am Dienstag, 9. August 2005 23:47 CEST schrieb Jeremie Le Hen: > Hi Emmanuel, > > > And you don't suffer from a big disk performance degradation with > > that? If you don't have I/O load it doesn't matter but I need usual > > I/O performance so I give each jail its own partition (GPT > > partitions). But I think some good guys are looking for fixing the > > performance issue like they already solved the nullfs problem :) > > Thanks again for that! (Jeff?) > > Are you sure that nullfs has been fixed ? In this case, the warning > at the end of mount_nullfs(8) manpage should be removed. I haven't done my own benchmarks yet, but I'm quiet sure that was fixed=20 about two or three months ago in 6.0-current. At that time I was figuring=20 out how to avoid nullfs, but decided to keep using it, so I was conviced=20 that it's been solved ;) But I think Jeff can tell you more, if I don't mix up names again.... =2DHarry --nextPart3999494.O1Stzz2vam Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBC+SeVBylq0S4AzzwRAk5RAJwNzaE3dJbU4qIRJj/RFU1DyME7+ACeN5fs MvoevyyzhW4vIJGDnMM9mxI= =Q1Fj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3999494.O1Stzz2vam--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200508100000.53489>