Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 22:02:22 +0100 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers) Cc: ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com (Thomas David Rivers) Subject: Re: Copious information on panic: ffs_valloc: dup alloc - IDEAS??? Message-ID: <Mutt.19970209220222.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199702091818.NAA23739@lakes.water.net>; from Thomas David Rivers on Feb 9, 1997 13:18:54 -0500 References: <199702091818.NAA23739@lakes.water.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Thomas David Rivers wrote: > You're saying the code in newfs.c that sets NTRACKS to 1 and > NSECTORS to 4096 would be changed. Yes, to e.g. 2 * 2048 instead. It's a mileage number only anyway, since Poul found out (experimentally) that it just works better than any (un)real number on today's zone-bit recorded and large cache disks. > If this is so, doesn't that mean that everyone is using a file system > that is questionable. Aren't inode reads/writes going to the wrong > places (albeit consistently?) I'm no filesystem expert at all, but this seems to be the case. The failure picture matches consistently with the reported MFS troubles (including mine), and it's probably also responsible for some other panic PRs you could find in the GNATS database. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Mutt.19970209220222.j>