Re: kern/38717: sysinst shouldn't create LFS file systems

[Andrew Doran <ad%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/38717; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Andrew Doran <ad%NetBSD.org@localhost>
To: Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
Cc: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost, kern-bug-people%NetBSD.org@localhost,
        gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Subject: Re: kern/38717: sysinst shouldn't create LFS file systems
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 23:04:38 +0100

 On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 09:55:18PM +0200, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
 
 > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:25:03PM +0000, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
 > > The following reply was made to PR kern/38717; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > > 
 > > From: "Jeremy C. Reed" <reed%reedmedia.net@localhost>
 > > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > > Cc: 
 > > Subject: Re: kern/38717: sysinst shouldn't create LFS file systems
 > > Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 18:16:33 -0500 (CDT)
 > > 
 > >  >  Both lfs and unionfs have come a long way, and are quite usable for 
 > > some.
 > >  
 > >  I enabled LFS for the first time a few days ago. My system which had 
 > >  around a 55+ day uptime, after a day became unstable and any process (it 
 > >  seemed) that wrote to my other partition (not LFS) would hang. LFS 
 > >  appeared to make my system unusable. I powercycled and newfs to FFS and 
 > >  remounted and all is well.
 > 
 > /usr/src on my home box has been lfs for several years now. I've not had
 > major problems with it.
 
 I have done a lot of stress testing on the file system code recently. Using
 a mixture of SGI fsstress, fsx, bonnie and postmark over different versions
 of NetBSD, my experience is that:
 
 - ffs, ext2fs, and tmpfs in -current /seem/ unbreakable
 - lfs and ffs+softdep can be broken within minutes
 - lfs in -current breaks within seconds
 
 Andrew