Subject: Re: Why not softdep per default?
To: Sean Davis <dive@endersgame.net>
From: Greywolf <greywolf@starwolf.com>
List: current-users
Date: 03/29/2005 17:36:57
[Thus spake Sean Davis ("SD: ") 8:30pm...]

SD: I've got three out of four (everything but my root / main stuff disk) disks
SD: running with softdeps, and while they DO perform better with softdeps, I've
SD: noticed some drawbacks, such as when (for example) untarring pkgsrc. If I'm
SD: doing it on a softdep'd partition on a nice fast disk (this box is an
SD: XP2700+ with 1GB ram) it'll complete in about 19 seconds - then lag the HELL
SD: out of the machine as it actually goes about doing the real writes. To the
SD: point where it almost feels like it's hardlocked the system. I've had this
SD: happen several times, only on softdep'd filesystems.
SD:
SD: - Sean

My problem with softdeps is untarring into an already populated filesystem
which is near capacity.  Because the files don't get recorded as truncated
or overwritten, it overflows the filesystem.  I have to remount with
"nosoftdep,noasync,sync" in order to avoid it.


				--*greywolf;
--
"Failure is not an option.  It comes bundled with the OS."  -- unknown