Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 20:33:39 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@hotjobs.com> Cc: Ronald Kuehn <kuehn@rz.tu-clausthal.de>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: panic: ffs_blkfree: bad size Message-ID: <199812040433.UAA03635@apollo.backplane.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812032307510.7329-100000@bright.fx.genx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> The /var filesystem does not have soft updates enabled.
:> I got a dump, but not from a debugging kernel.
:>
:> [ current as of Dec 2 ]
:
:Just wondering, why are people running softupdates and non-softupdates on
:the same box, or just plain not using softupdates?
:
:I thought that it is as reliable as regular mounts and faster? Or are
:there issues that I haven't noticed?
:
:Or are you guys testing for the FreeBSD project?
:
:-Alfred
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm running softupdates on all
of our production FreeBSD-current boxes at BEST (a grand total of 1
machine at the moment), and all of my home machines (3 boxes).
All partitions.
I've had zero problems with it. The plan at BEST is to turn on softupdates
on all partitions on all -current machines as we migrate boxes over from
-stable over the next few months and since BEST is a commercial
environment, we've paid Kick's site license fee.
I am running with vfs.ffs.doreallocblks=0, however until the crashes /
crash confusion is resolved - the reported crashes/fs-corruption is
just too dangerous for me to risk turning it on. Once fixed I expect
doreallocblks to be a boon to the news and web servers.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon Engineering, HiWay Technologies, Inc. & BEST Internet
Communications & God knows what else.
<dillon@backplane.com> (Please include original email in any response)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199812040433.UAA03635>