Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:49:53 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: softupdates Message-ID: <199902101949.LAA85603@apollo.backplane.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.04.9902101120010.9237-100000@feral-gw>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:I have reported, several times, problems having to do with large
:FFS filesystems, possibly related to softupdates, posibly not, to
:Kirk, Luoqi, etc... Nobody showed any interest in looking at the
:problems - in fact, the email wasn't even answered.
:
:As a consequence, FreeBSD lost out for being considered a candidate
:at NASA/Ames for large mass storage. Shrug...It may or may not be
:true that softupdates, per se, are stable. In my opinion, FFS as
:offered by FreeBSD (and NetBSD) have not shown themselves to be
:adequate to large (>500GB) filesystems. Sad to say, ext2 under
:linux works better.
Matt, I don't recall seeing anything from you in regards to
large filesystems. Looking in the archives, I see one report
on Jan 27th from you relating to softupdates, but you indicate
that softupdates was not enabled on the volume in question,
so it seems unlikely that it is related to softupdates specifically.
There have been several reports of dirty-buffer panics which is
of concern, but I haven't been able to reproduce the panic myself
yet.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
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?199902101949.LAA85603>