Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (May 16), Michael Hamburg said: > >>On May 15, 2004, at 10:41 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 15 May 2004, Michael Hamburg wrote: >>> >>>>On May 15, 2004, at 9:08 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>>> >>>>>I'm seriously considering putting 5.x onto my next server, to take >>>>>advantage of, if nothing else, the reduction in the GIANT LOCK >>>>>reliance ... one "concern" I have is how fsck works in 5.x ... >>>>> >>>>>Right now, on 4.x, I have an fsck running that has been going for >>>>>~3hrs now: >>>>> >>>>># date; ps aux | grep fsck >>>>>Sat May 15 22:04:00 ADT 2004 >>>>>root 40 99.0 4.5 185756 185796 p0 R+ 6:55PM 164:01.60 fsck -y /dev/da0s1h >>>>> >>>>>and is in Phase 4 ... >>>>> >>>>>In 5.x, if I'm not mistaken, fsck's are backgrounded on reboot, so >>>>>that the system comes up faster ... but: >>>>> >>>>>a. wouldn't that slow down the fsck itself, since all the >>>>>processes on the machine would be using CPU/memory? >>>> >>>>Yes. You can probably renice it or something, though, and it >>>>wouldn't take that much longer. > > > Fsck takes very little CPU; it's almost all disk I/O, and bgfsck tries > to throttle its load if it thinks that there's too much disk load. > Actually, bgfsck unconditionally inserts a delay into every 8th i/o operation to try to keep from saturating the disks. Unfortunately this isn't terribly sophisticated and it results in bgfsck taking an eternity whether the system is idle, loaded, or reniced. A _really_ nice TODO item for FreeBSD 6.0 would be a real I/O scheduler. There are plenty of papers on it, some even focused on FreeBSD. Any volunteers? ScottReceived on Sun May 16 2004 - 07:44:23 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:54 UTC