Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 15:51:48 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU> Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>, Darren Pilgrim <dmp@pantherdragon.org>, Matthew Emmerton <matt@gsicomp.on.ca>, Daxbert <daxbert_news@dweebsoft.com>, Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>, Heinrich Rebehn <rebehn@ant.uni-bremen.de>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why is there no JFS? Message-ID: <3E4C2F94.8964A74D@mindspring.com> References: <045401c2d2db$f9d45c30$0a0aa8c0@dweebsoft.com> <20030212225631.GA10375@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <005801c2d2eb$aa5fae60$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca> <3E4ADDDE.5040208@pantherdragon.org> <3E4B138F.26E32E75@mindspring.com> <20030212210721.A9481@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <20030213051952.GA11572@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3E4B467B.4DCF6D5@mindspring.com> <20030213074449.GA12084@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3E4BA1D2.E259308@mindspring.com> <20030213191356.GA14560@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Schultz wrote: > Thus spake Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>: > > In other words, if it would have worked with soft updates turned > > off, then it will work with soft updates turned on. > > My point was that a busy disk that is nearly 100% full will > probably experience intermitted ``disk full'' errors anyway, > so it suffices to simply deal with cases such as > 'rm -rf foo && immediately create lots more files', which > softupdates does handle in -CURRENT. I think the problem that was specifically mentioned, with regard to / (after a lot of assumptions) was a file replacement which had to delete an old file and make room for a new one. I do this all the time, by replacing the kernel and all modules, and keeping "one behind", e.g. rm x.old; mv x x.old; cp blah x. This fails on a soft updates system because the deletion is not actually done to the point of the space having been recovered, before the copies are started. > > IMO, this is not the reason for them being off on /; the real > > reason is as I've stated: sysinstall expects the common case to > > be an initial install, not operations after the initial install, > > and so does not turn it on by default. > > The original reason was due to the possibility of installworld > failing, due to the case described above not being handled > particularly well in FreeBSD 4.X. Sysinstall is perfectly happy > with creating a root FS with softupdates enabled. If someone > wants to bother changing the default for what little difference it > might make in installworld/installkernel times, I would support it. Eh. I don't think it's that useful, but sysinstall in any mode other than "create the FS in the first place/new install" is not really going to have a lot of opportunity to do that bit flip. The most common way I use sysinstall is to NFS mount a CDROM image off some machine, get the sysinstall image that matches the CDROM image, and copy it to /tmp (this is a bitch; the sysinstall image should be made available by itself on distribution CDROMs; as it is, you have to vnconfig, copy a file off it, and vnconfig again, and copy a file off that, to get the sysinstall program). It's about the only way you can upgrade a rackmount machine with a serial console and no floppy or CDROM drive on it (you need a non-serial console to use the Intel PXE crap to netboot). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E4C2F94.8964A74D>