Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c
From: Tim J. Robbins (tjr_at_FreeBSD.org)
Date: 06/19/03
- Previous message: The Hermit Hacker: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- In reply to: The Hermit Hacker: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- Next in thread: Marc G. Fournier: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- Reply: Marc G. Fournier: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:14:30 +1000 To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 08:28:37PM -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
> > On (2003/06/18 13:53), Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >
> > > With that said, I will also add, that I will take an incredibly
> > > dim view of anybody who tries to add more gunk in this area, and
> > > that I am perfectly willing to derail unionfs and nullfs (or pretty
> > > much anything else on the list above) if that is what it takes to
> > > clean up the buffer cache.
> >
> > Makes sense. After all, these filesystems are only just now recovering
> > from "we can fix these later" breakage introduced years ago. What's a
> > few more years without 'em? :-)
>
> 'K, this kinda hurts ... there are a growing # of us that are actually
> using unionfs and nullfs on production systems ... not small servers, but
> several thousand processes with over 100 union mounts ... other then the
> vnode leak stuff that David has been investigating, I've yet to see
> anything that I would considering warranting the 'DO NOT USE / CAVEAT
> EMPTOR' that is in the man pages ... :(
At least one of the sections is well-deserved: umapfs is horribly broken on
-current, and only works by accident on previous releases. I'm actually
considering putting an even stronger warning on that one. The others (null and
union) aren't nearly as bad, and have been fixed significantly since the
notice was put on the manpages.
Tim
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: The Hermit Hacker: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- In reply to: The Hermit Hacker: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- Next in thread: Marc G. Fournier: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- Reply: Marc G. Fournier: "Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
- Re: Debian sid and "risk management"
... > If you think testing or unstable is suitable for production systems you are ...
And having 19 Sid servers in our data center and another 68 at ... But I do absolutely
agree that for mission critical systems, ... You can get my public key from any
of the ... (Debian-User) - Re: Your CVS fix 1.109 to union_vnops.c
... >> for nullfs and not for unionfs, ... upper layer file
... (freebsd-current) - Re: nullfs in 4.10
... I have 4 servers in place right now, each running a minimum of 30 jail'd ...
environments where usr is mounted ... The only caveat I'll make *against* unionfs
at this time, ... when I say "easy to trigger" ... ... (freebsd-stable) - Re: Your CVS fix 1.109 to union_vnops.c
... > for nullfs and not for unionfs, ... 'nullfs' has only one underlying
file system, ... The latter is the inode number in case of UFS. ... With 'unionfs'
you can have underlying files from two different layers ... (freebsd-current) - Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/nullfs null.h null_subr.c null_vnops.c
... these filesystems are only just now recovering ... > using unionfs
and nullfs on production systems ... ... (freebsd-arch)