From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Dec 2 9:57:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from winston.freebsd.org (adsl-64-173-15-98.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [64.173.15.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8948837B416; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 09:57:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from winston.freebsd.org (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fB2Hvbq11360; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 09:57:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@winston.freebsd.org) To: Robert Watson Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Enabling Softupdates in default install on -CURRENT In-Reply-To: Message from Robert Watson of "Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:27:30 EST." Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 09:57:37 -0800 Message-ID: <11356.1007315857@winston.freebsd.org> From: Jordan Hubbard Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sounds reasonable to me. I think it's been well-tested enough by now. > I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't time to switch sysinstall to start > configuring softupdates "by default" for file systems at install-time. We > currently allow it to be selected, but don't enable it by default. I > would propose it be turned on by default for all non-root file systems, or > some other similar rule (file systems <64MB, ..). Given that this is the > primary recommendation made for system performance tuning, and not only > addresses performance but improved reliability, it seems to me that this > would be a sensible change to introduce at some useful breaking point, and > 5.0 provides a good opportunity to do that. > > Any objections? > > Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project > robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message