Subject: Re: Building a huge file server
To: Andy Ruhl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Zafer Aydogan <email@example.com>
Date: 07/05/2006 18:00:34
Kirill is working on journaling for ffs at the moment. Beside that,
NetBSD also have an LFS filesystem which is still work in progress.
But I did a lot of testing recently with LFS and was surprised about
stability and speed. You should give it a try. I also tested LFS on a
root partition aka LFS-root, which is actually not supported, but LFS
as root is still unstable (panics) but LFS on an additional partition
Just disklabel, newfs_lfs and mount it.
2006/7/5, Andy Ruhl <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On 7/5/06, Daniel Carosone <email@example.com> wrote:
> > It may be heretical of me to suggest this on a NetBSD list, but for
> > something like this - and especially if you need it now - have you
> > considered opensolaris and zfs? The SATA-controller question is much
> > more difficult and fiddly there, but the filesystem questions much
> > less so. fsck on something this size takes way way way too long.
> People ask all the time if there is a journalling filesystem for
> NetBSD, and I guess this would be the appropriate time to ask if there
> is at least any progress in this area.
> All large un*x systems these days are usually not requiring fsck on a
> "dirty" reboot. If it did it would make life extremely difficult for
> some admins for sure.
> I'm sure it's way over my head to make any comments here, but in my
> own experience I've had good luck with turning off disk write cache (I
> have no idea how this affects performance) with soft updates turned
> on, and up until now I haven't had anything drastic happen. But NetBSD
> does want to do fsck anyway on reboot... I'm managing just over 1TB
> but it's all split into smaller filesystems. The biggest one is 300
> gigs. This is on older ATA100/133 drives, with NetBSD 2.0.2. No major
> problems yet, but I'm not doing anything fancy either.