From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 23 15:27:32 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9006CF for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:27:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ipluta@wp.pl) Received: from mx3.wp.pl (mx3.wp.pl [212.77.101.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A87CF8FC0C for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (wp-smtpd smtp.wp.pl 9149 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2012 16:27:29 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wp.pl; s=1024a; t=1353684449; bh=0moPrhJ5SPVEp1mVIf4QK91ZeYOxwBOOdxEqYWPnzqo=; h=From:To:Subject; b=x+QEH9tT1TtxCo7XH99V1r+EG7kaAuOFI+hn8YpGoVpTms5aNiKmrEGBrkw7ZXm4V NbHum4MkVdeKYwyKftQlYx76HX9gUjM7dweWwPwMR4/GJvpxT4/ANKeardVAZYdJwN l5UkJto8f7CBh1EvKS+336NnYhkIeKroN16V7c0E= Received: from 82-210-167-137.home.aster.pl (HELO [192.168.1.143]) (ipluta@[82.210.167.137]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp.wp.pl (WP-SMTPD) with CAMELLIA256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 23 Nov 2012 16:27:29 +0100 Message-ID: <50AF95DB.9000502@wp.pl> Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:27:23 +0100 From: Ireneusz Pluta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: newfs -m for large filesystem Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-WP-AV: skaner antywirusowy poczty Wirtualnej Polski S. A. X-WP-SPAM: NO 0000000 [sZNR] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 15:27:32 -0000 Hello, are the remarks given for the -m option in tunefs(8) and newfs(8) still the same for very large filesystems, or the free-space margin might be safely reduced in these cases? For instance, when I have a 12TB filesystem then the default 8% margin gets close to the value of 1TB, which seems like a waste of capacity. Thanks Irek.