Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 14:45:13 +0200 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely12.cicely.de> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Softupdates a mount option? Message-ID: <20040527124512.GV63479@cicely12.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <40B5DE26.4040901@fer.hr> References: <40B4ECC8.50808@fer.hr> <20040526202849.GA37162@freebie.xs4all.nl> <40B519DA.7000708@fer.hr> <20040527120819.B8434@gamplex.bde.org> <40B5DE26.4040901@fer.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 02:25:10PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > Bruce Evans wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 May 2004, Ivan Voras wrote: > > > > > >>- I was creating a md drive with mdmfs, and it felt rather awkward to > >>control softupdates via command line parameters (a sidequestion: does it > >>make any sense enabling SU on a memory drive by default?). As it seems > >>now, every such utility that handles (well, at least creates) a ffs > >>filesystem must handle SU-controlling options as command line parameters. > > > > > > It makes sense to never enable soft updates on a memory drive, since soft > > updates uses extra CPU cycles to try to speed up i/o to real drives (and > > Then maybe the default should be changed? > > From 'man mdmfs': > By default, mdmfs creates a swap-based (MD_SWAP) disk with soft-updates > enabled and mounts it on mount-point. swap != ram SU makes perfectly sense for swap backed md drives. -- B.Walter BWCT http://www.bwct.de bernd@bwct.de info@bwct.de
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040527124512.GV63479>