* Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001207 00:52] wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>
> >I'd do it, but I don't really have a grasp on the optimal parameters
> >to set based on FS size.
>
> So far I don't see any indication here (or elsewhere) that anybody
> has that grasp.
>
> I guess that is really a testimony to FFS/UFS's qualites...
>
> The main thing is that you significantly reduce your fsck time if
> you reduce the number of inodes.
Oh, your tunables just reduce the number of inodes? That may come
as a suprise to people that are using the larger disks to store
images and web/ftp stuff.
I guess we ought to leave it alone, maybe if I have the time I'll
see about popping up a dialog to ask if they'd like to make the
inode/fsck tradeoff.
But since Kirk is getting close with his snapshot work it might
really not be necessary.
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
"I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
