Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 06:39:47 -0800 From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no>, Randell Jesup <rjesup@wgate.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Like to commit my diskprep Message-ID: <200011031440.eA3Eebp39614@cwsys.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 03 Nov 2000 02:14:51 PST." <200011031014.eA3AEpV45562@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200011031014.eA3AEpV45562@earth.backplane.com>, Matt Dillon writes: > > :> This is a matter of preference (hence the reference to paint) and also the > :> use intended for the system in question. However, the code is not going to > :> be significantly more complex due to this, and I think it's a much better, > :> ie cleaner, way of doing it. > : > :One question that probably interests many of us is, can tuning those > :numbers reduce fsck time? Is fsck time strictly proportional to disk > :size, or does the number of inodes and/or cylinder groups affect it? > : > :DES > :-- > :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org > > Yes. Increasing the number of bytes per inode will reduce the number > of inodes and thus reduce fsck time. Increasing the number of cylinders > in a group will localize inodes into bigger chunks, reducing seeking > and also thus reduce fsck time. Wouldn't that tend to generally reduce day-to-day performance as well? I suspect that Kirk and co. at CSRG had a good reason for choosing the defaults they did. Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437 Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766 Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA Province of BC 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?200011031440.eA3Eebp39614>