Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 21:45:03 +0200 (CEST) From: Cyrille Lefevre <clefevre@citeweb.net> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@ns2.freenix.org> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/newfs newfs.8 newfs.c Message-ID: <200110151945.f9FJj4D27624@gits.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20011015130353.B25715@ns2.freenix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ollivier Robert wrote: > According to Peter Wemm: > > Personally, I'm worried about using 16k/2k on anything less than a large (say > > larger than 1G) file system. > > Well, all my machines use 16k/2k for all filesystems now and I've never got > any problem with that. It wastes a bit more space since fragments are now > twice as big but that's about it. > > > If we made the defaults adjust to the fs size, I think that would be nice. > > (ie: default to max -c possible, and switch to 16k/2k for "big" fs's) > > Like 8k/1k for <1GB and 16k/2k for >1GB ? Can be done I think. I'll have a > look at that but bde has probably already written that patch years ago :-) is this 1GB limit really accurate ? do you know any todays drives lower than 4GB ? Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:clefevre@citeweb.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110151945.f9FJj4D27624>