Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 30 Dec 2012 20:41:20 +0100 (CET)
From:      Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To:        Quentin SCHWERKOLT <develloper.unix@hotmail.fr>
Cc:        "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: UFS1 vs UFS2
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212302040590.4966@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
In-Reply-To: <BAY002-W211AF4BA0884C546AE231E6843D0@phx.gbl>
References:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1212301420030.3192@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <BAY002-W211AF4BA0884C546AE231E6843D0@phx.gbl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
i chose with newfs as i don't use installer :)

anyway - it is not an answer to the question.

On Sun, 30 Dec 2012, Quentin SCHWERKOLT wrote:

> Since FreeBSD 9.0, you can choose between UFS1 and UFS2 in bsdinstall(8) when creating a new freebsd-ufs partition.
>
> Q. Schwerkolt
>
>> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 14:21:26 +0100
>> From: wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
>> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
>> Subject: UFS1 vs UFS2
>>
>> OpenBSD by default use UFS1 for partitions smaller than 1TB.
>>
>> FreeBSD use always UFS2. UFS2 uses double the amount of space for inodes.
>> basic operation seems the same.
>>
>> Does it make sense to use UFS1 for small filesystem (on SSD) that would
>> have few millions of files. It will take less space for inodes, but how
>> about performance?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1212302040590.4966>