Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 18 Oct 2001 22:50:23 +0200
From:      Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>
To:        Randell Jesup <rjesup@wgate.com>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sbin/newfs newfs.8 newfs.c
Message-ID:  <20011018225023.B41916@tara.freenix.org>
In-Reply-To: <0000157003191707d1@[192.168.1.4]>; from rjesup@wgate.com on Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 10:40:19AM -0400
References:  <200110110851.f9B8ptf60343@freefall.freebsd.org><20011011112527.A54224@coffee.q9media.com><20011011154203.C44561@dragon.nuxi.com><20011013143225.B4527@ns2.freenix.org><20011013172706.A53976@dragon.nuxi.com><20011014160303.A22301@ns2.freenix.org><20011014194232.A50125@dragon.nuxi.com><00005ba2015f4b07d1@[192.168.1.4]> <0000157003191707d1@[192.168.1.4]>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
According to Randell Jesup:
> So, do we really have problems with 16k/4k/64?  If so, let's fix the
> problems.

I don't know really if we have problems with something other than a 8:1 ratio
but 4k is too big IMO and wastes too much space.

> Or should we reduce the defaults to 16k/2k?  If so, what about existing
> FS's with these values?  If values above that are broken, should we
> disable them in newfs, or at least print a warning?

I'm all for 16/2k regardless of the FS size.
-- 
Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr
FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 5.0-CURRENT #80: Sun Jun  4 22:44:19 CEST 2000

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: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011018225023.B41916>