From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Jul 7 14:59:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from freeway.dcfinc.com (cx74889-a.phnx3.az.home.com [24.1.193.157]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19FF637B407 for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:59:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chad@freeway.dcfinc.com) Received: (from chad@localhost) by freeway.dcfinc.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23267; Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:59:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from chad) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 14:59:45 -0700 From: "Chad R. Larson" To: "A. L. Meyers" Cc: Robert Banniza , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: JFS Message-ID: <20010707145945.A23220@freeway.dcfinc.com> References: <20010707230738.H626-100000@consult-meyers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010707230738.H626-100000@consult-meyers.com>; from a.l.meyers@consult-meyers.com on Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:14:17PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:14:17PM +0200, A. L. Meyers wrote: > Which is not at all stating or implying that UFS is not a very > good FS. But what Robert says is simply a statement of fact. > Experiencing one-on how quickly a JFS (e. g. Reiser) recovers > is really impressive. Well, my $0.02US... I've got something like 10 years experience in commercial environments with the Veritas file system (and that of it's predecessor company Tolerant Systems). I agree that fast recovery is spiffy, and on an OLTP system where every second of down time is =real= money lost it's worth the cost. And VXFS has some other neat tricks, such as snapshots and block-level incremental backups and the ability to grow and shrink a running file system. And, some special tricks for the case you're running a database in cooked space. And... (you get the idea). But the journal itself is no magic bullet. It costs performance on anything that changes meta data. It can hurt you if you tune it incorrectly. I think the way Kirk is headed with soft updates, plus background fsck is just as good, perhaps better. So, summary: If you need the bells and whistles that more complex filesystems provide, then by all means use them. But if you're just trying to avoid the fsck wait time at boot-up, I don't think it's worth the complexity and administration time to go with something newer and less bullet-proof than what we're using now. [[Of course, we =are= still waiting for a good release of the background fsck...]] -crl -- Chad R. Larson (CRL15) 602-953-1392 Brother, can you paradigm? chad@dcfinc.com chad@larsons.org larson1@home.com DCF, Inc. - 14623 North 49th Place, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254-2207 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message