Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 Feb 1999 05:49:55 -0800 (PST)
From:      Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com>
To:        Dru Nelson <dnelson@redwoodsoft.com>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: softupdates
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902120539540.17711-100000@feral-gw>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.91.990211235629.4075N-100000@pacman.redwoodsoft.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Hi, Dru!

> I'm surprised that there are problems. I have never noticed any.
> Also, linux has that 2gig filesize limit, which makes it harder to really
> utilize a large 500GB filesystem.

Corrected by Matti Aarno's patches. I'm not saying that NASA/Ames has gone
with ext2- I'm just saying that of FreeBSD/FFS, NetBSD/FFS and Linux/ext2,
Linux/ext2 has shown itself to have the least problems in terms of data
corruption or system panics when testing with filesystems > 100GB. Buffer
cache suckdown is another problem, and up until Steve Tweedies patches in
the last couple of weeks, Linux couldn't possible be considered a real
candidate because while writing but large files you'd suck down 95% of
primary memory for write behind buffers, making system response go away
almost entirely.

> 
> What were the requirements for NASA/Ames?
> 
> 

Replacement for the Convex (chuck && scott) machines, i.e., > 900GB
reliable standard filesystem that you could then put RASH hooks into
later. Whether these would be via locally attached disk or via a HIPPI
network block device ('raw frame' driver) was/in indeterminate.

It's not clear whether anything but NetBSD will be used for these 
machines, but there had been so many hardware related and also possible 
FFS related problems with the MSS3 project that I was allowed to go off
and search for possible alternatives. Digital Unix/ADVFS as is Solaris/UFS 
and Solaris/SAMFS (LSC's produce) are also candidates, but those are less
attractive because they're not open source solutions. At any rate, at the
time I was doing this, I could not demonstrate FreeBSD/FFS to be a
superior combo than NetBSD/FFS, hence the term 'loss'.

-matt



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.04.9902120539540.17711-100000>