From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Nov  3 22:26:55 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A55E8C
 for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sat,  3 Nov 2012 22:26:55 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from jroberson@jroberson.net)
Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com
 [209.85.220.54])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC038FC08
 for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sat,  3 Nov 2012 22:26:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id bi1so3339809pad.13
 for <stable@freebsd.org>; Sat, 03 Nov 2012 15:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=google.com; s=20120113;
 h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id
 :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type:x-gm-message-state;
 bh=Tp6q9uK8CJekok5LHtS2zKbp3SEdCdANZPKTCLgNCyA=;
 b=nAeznwddnsGtdQx7LmgE9KLreTr1LL0fFXbJfXkn6dtCDIK17Mrl9xavALTVZfowtM
 TXiyXCrKJnk0JrUsDSNUUq5QBz5ueEKkYQEwiU0al2+iJpe74EH56M77UDLEixbLs8on
 UtF7nY/rhX0/EnZoIV76LKwyt10ghFectEGUFizHSdy/Ote2wx5QQ/ozbcqdAhTAdpD/
 jJa9PTwUXL3TLGdBMllMJFuWD2irtdEe4Grh2JdJbg1+/5BHL4KPDDpVrtTC2iGOziXJ
 pZ8vmgUUCoXJ6g3T1p3B+thYoyCMeJ5lCiPkzmVihcfL4QbhIciNhBK+4s5AMJOKkm22
 SB7g==
Received: by 10.68.232.163 with SMTP id tp3mr18340173pbc.44.1351981614502;
 Sat, 03 Nov 2012 15:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rrcs-66-91-135-210.west.biz.rr.com
 (rrcs-66-91-135-210.west.biz.rr.com. [66.91.135.210])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ix9sm7956601pbc.7.2012.11.03.15.26.53
 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 03 Nov 2012 15:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 12:25:30 -1000 (HST)
From: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@jroberson.net>
X-X-Sender: jroberson@desktop
To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net>
Subject: Re: Why is SU+J undesirable on SSDs?
In-Reply-To: <201211032130.PAA04484@lariat.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1211031224570.1947@desktop>
References: <201211032130.PAA04484@lariat.net>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlXezvyYhRJaHXZkw9M0EiPkrWAcT2zU7uCO9Wy41rfUnzJpYRVHo0Tzd05vP/WGIlBXsDq
Cc: stable@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 22:26:55 -0000

On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, Brett Glass wrote:

> Have been following the thread related to SU+J, and am wondering: why is it
> considered to be undesirable on SSDs (assuming that they have good wear
> leveling)? I have been enabling it on systems with SSDs, hoping that between
> the lack of rotating media and the journaling I would have very robust
> systems.

I know of no reason to support this notion.  Although SSDs are so fast you 
might be happy to wait for the fsck time in exchange for snapshots.

Jeff

>
> --Brett Glass
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>