In message <20030331084303.GF746@phaeton.entropie.net>
	on Mon, 31 Mar 2003 10:43:03 +0200,
	Martin Weber <Ephaeton@gmx.net> wrote:
> > I've lost my local CVS repogitry once.  You should check it under
> > heavy file system access.
> 
> I'm using it successfully for some time, and also under high load. You
> said later it was in conjunction with softdeps, well, I don't use softdeps,
> for I don't consider the softdeps stable. I consider NEW_BUFQ on its own 
Hmm, it is too bad that a feature containted in release version
(i.e. NetBSD 1.6) isn't reliable than containted in current, unless it
is described in somewhere.

At least, sys/arch/i386/GENERIC's comment looks SOFTDEP is safer than
NEW_BUFQ_STRATEGY.

options 	SOFTDEP		# FFS soft updates support.

# Enable experimental buffer queue strategy for better responsiveness under 
# high disk I/O load. Use it with caution - it's not proven to be stable yet.
#options 	NEW_BUFQ_STRATEGY

> as stable though. And you don't need to enable NEW_BUFQ on a softdeps
> partition to get crashes and data loss :)
With my understanding, SOFTDEP is file system level feature and
NEW_BUFQ is device driver level.  I think that NEW_BUFQ_STRATEGY isn't
enable/disable per partition.

Anyway, using both might result a bad influecnce in performance, it
shouldn't crash.  ;-(

-- 
Takahiro Kambe <taca@back-street.net>