Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:16:02 -0600 From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> To: Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: More On Samba And Softupdates Message-ID: <AANLkTikLo%2BhqbDPreTNncNSRSApJW12ztYNFkKZHtTp%2B@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4CE94F25.3000609@tundraware.com> References: <4CE94F25.3000609@tundraware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com>wrote: > > This drive is being used as a backup drive for all the workstations on > this particular network, and "reliable" is much more important than " > slightly faster". > As someone already said, SU is probably not the culprit here. I've used Samba + SU for a long time with no such problems although I have no current setups to verify. SU substantially increases disk IO, it's not 'slightly faster' it's much faster. The error you see is probably the result of flaky drive or controller as the additional IO provided by SU allows the flakiness to show through. Although from what you describe my choice for the drive would be gjournal + UFS. If you've got a lot of asynchronous IO that's a better solution. -- Adam Vande More
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTikLo%2BhqbDPreTNncNSRSApJW12ztYNFkKZHtTp%2B>