Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:15:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Configuring an older server for speed... Message-ID: <20080702171507.W1806@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20080702151515.0e7da28e@gumby.homeunix.com.> References: <a9f4a3860806301711k707f79cewd491e76418eb1440@mail.gmail.com> <20080701134312.Q1294@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <a9f4a3860807010826w6b5dbc9dj9265ba12097eb3b4@mail.gmail.com> <20080702151515.0e7da28e@gumby.homeunix.com.>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD. The three > cache types: ufs,aufs and diskd are all the same on disk. diskd is ufs > with extra processes to handle disk access, aufs uses threads instead. i don't know what is preferred. i know what works. only ufs and diskd is reliable, ufs is single threaded and blocking, diskd=one process for each spool dedicated just for disk I/O
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080702171507.W1806>