From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Dec 21 9: 0:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from resnet.uoregon.edu (resnet.uoregon.edu [128.223.144.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964CB153EF for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:00:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by resnet.uoregon.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA33478; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:00:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:00:37 -0800 (PST) From: Doug White To: tsikora@powerusersbbs.com Cc: FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: SOFTUPDATES In-Reply-To: <385EFAEF.5F286795@home.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 20 Dec 1999, Ted Sikora wrote: > Is anyone running the SOFTUPDATES option with Stable? I just enabled it > and was wondering if there are any issues I should be aware of > performance wise. Any problems? I enabled it for the /usr > filesystem. Any reason why / is not specifically recommended? One other data point. Softupdates can cause some interesting deadlocks when a disk fills up. Since /tmp is very susceptable to filling, you don't want softupdates set on the /tmp volume either (which is generally /). Doug White | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | www.FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message