On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 11:18:16AM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > :[...] > : > :> But to be absolutely safe, I would follow Bruce's original suggestion > :> and increase BKVASIZE to 64K, for your particular system. > :> > :> > :After doing this and testing our backup script, the machine panicked two > :hours later (about half-way through the backup) with > :"initiate_write_inodeblock_ufs2: already started" (in > :ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c)... I guess, block sizes above 16Kb are just buggy > :and newfs(8) should be honest about it... > : > : -mi > > Well, it's possible that UFS has bugs related to large block sizes. > People have gotten bitten on and off over the years but usually it > works ok if you leave the 8:1 blocksize:fragsize ratio intact. e.g. > if you have a 64KB block size then you should use a 8K frag size. > If you have a 32KB block size then you should use a 4K frag size. > > I think the buffer cache itself is is likely not the source of this > particular bug. FYI, I ran the package build cluster with 4:1 ratios for a few months and did not have problems. If there are major bugs there I would have expected to come across them. Kris
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:17 UTC