On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 07:36:00AM -0700, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > > Your contention that the installer does not make policy decisions is > > equally spurious. The installer makes many policy decisions, including > > the disk layout, the size of the swap partition, the name of the pool, > > the use of boot environments (which I dislike but am not allowed to > > override), the number of filesets and their mountpoints (which I also > > dislike and am not allowed to override either), etc. The Unix > > philosophy is to push such decisions up the stack, not down. The > > decision to align partitions on 4096-byte boundaries because we're not > > sure of the correct number but know for a fact that using a smaller > > number can have a huge impact on performance is the installer's to make. > > Those are all things that the operating system does not have defaults > for: there are no tools like, say, gpart or newfs that layout disks in > any even vaguely automated way, and so no tools that would ever have > defaults for, say, the size of a swap partition except for the > installer. As such, the defaults are quite properly in the installer. > This is quite different: there are many tools that care about disk > alignment (say, gpart) and, by default, use the GEOM stripesize. The > installer is, after this patch, overriding what was meant to be a > system-wide default. > > My concern is that pushing this into the installer means that newfs, > zfs, gpart, etc., which all look at the GEOM stripesize for preferred > alignment, will still have suboptimal behavior on systems affected by > your patch. If we identified which drivers are reporting the wrong > alignment, we could fix the whole system at a go by changing it there. > As it is, we now have inconsistent default behavior for partitions > between tools (the installer and sade will now use a different alignment > than gpart on whatever systems you were trying to fix here) and between > pre- and post-installation environments.
In long term, prefered aligment is forsing 4k (or may be more): install system on 512b [mirror] disk aligment now may be need required replace disk to 4k aligment. For more flexsible in future now best chois is 4k or more. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"