Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-16 Thread Polytropon
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:11:30 -0400 (EDT), d...@safeport.com wrote:
> I have had two systems die with bad disks.

Personally, I never had trouble with bad disks, but with
defective file systems (origin unknown), and follow-up
trouble caused by background fsck that prevented me many
years from accessing my data. Going the "old fashioned"
way brought everything back.

Long story short: A present .snapshot from the 1st
background fsck (which was introduced as default in
5.0, as far as I remember) caused fsck from working
as expected; after removing this file, I got all the
missing data back.

Luckily, the problem didn't seem to be related to
actual disk failure, as SMART data didn't give a hint
about that. I did work with a 1:1 dd copy anyway.



> Modern disks die silently which I think is too bad.

You usally see messages in dmesg / console that indicate
disk trouble. In mos cases, those messages say that the
disk is already dying - it's too late for "repair". So
time for backup and replacement. Seems that this is the
result of continuing bigger and cheaper disks...



> If this is 
> happening and you have data you want to recover you
> might try booting in single user move and using fsck
> manually on each slice.

The fsck program operates on partitions, not on slices.
Terminology, dear Watson. :-)




-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread doug


On Wed, 15 Sep 2010, Polytropon wrote:


On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:47:38 +0200, "Remko Lodder"  wrote:



Almost every time after improper shutdown (poweroff) and reboot I get
into interactive fsck.

I am being asked whole bunch of questions to which I just have to answer
Y (what are my other options?)

Why drop user into interactive fsck if there is not much choice anyways?
Is there a way to set it up the way it doesn't drop into interactive
mode? Like answer 'Y' to all questions?

Yuri


I think this might do your trick:

fsck_y_enable="NO"  # Set to YES to do fsck -y if the initial preen
fails.
fsck_y_flags="" # Additional flags for fsck -y

The reason for this to get interactively is because this  might messup
with your filesystem, and you are the one responsible for your filesystem,
not us or the autmated system. So in case you want to "play" with that,
that's entirely up to you.

In addition, I can imagine that companies (been there done it) do not want
to fsck -y by default, this because of the mentioned potential corruption
and dataloss.


Very important point.

As an addition, allow me to mention

background_fsck="YES"

as an entry in /etc/rc.conf. This will let the system boot up and perform
fsck checks while the system is running - running on a maybe defective or
inconsistent file system. This is dangerous, but possible. It utilizes a
snapshot mechanism which can cause further trouble (lost / emptyinodes
and disappearing subtrees of files).

Personally, if fsck requires YOUR attention, there's usually a reason for
this. The reason is possible data loss or file system corruption where YOU
take the responsibility of decision, not fsck. By default, fsck does not
do damaging, but under strange circumstances, it can happen. For example,
if you want to do a special kind of data recovery or forensic analysis on
a file system, you potentially DO NOT WANT fsck to assume "y" for all the
questions because that can make your job harder.

A common additional "y flag" is -f (means fsck -yf) to force all operations
suggested by fsck and confirming them.

I have had two systems die with bad disks. This email contains great information 
and spot-on advice from my experience. When I was ready to give up on my last 
system I did a -yf in single user mode and was able to get most of my data 
because the bad sectors were in /usr/local which had many missing files and 
directories. Modern disks die silently which I think is too bad. If this is 
happening and you have data you want to recover you might try booting in single 
user move and using fsck manually on each slice. If you are lucky, your errors 
will be in /tmp or /var.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread David Brodbeck
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Yuri  wrote:
> Thanks Remko!
> I never had spare 5 secs for this :-), and now when I left my computer to
> friends (not computer savvy) they got into this trap. There is no
> database... I think installer better asks this question during installation
> since many users just run a desktop and -y is pretty much ok for them.

Train your friends to shut the machine down by pressing (not holding
down!) the power button.  On any modern machine ACPI should trigger a
clean shutdown/poweroff.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Yuri

On 09/15/10 09:47, Remko Lodder wrote:

I think this might do your trick:

fsck_y_enable="NO"  # Set to YES to do fsck -y if the initial preen
fails.
fsck_y_flags="" # Additional flags for fsck -y

The reason for this to get interactively is because this  might messup
with your filesystem, and you are the one responsible for your filesystem,
not us or the autmated system. So in case you want to "play" with that,
that's entirely up to you.

In addition, I can imagine that companies (been there done it) do not want
to fsck -y by default, this because of the mentioned potential corruption
and dataloss.

Thanks
remko

p.s. This was found within 5 seconds in /etc/defaults/rc.conf.

   


Thanks Remko!
I never had spare 5 secs for this :-), and now when I left my computer 
to friends (not computer savvy) they got into this trap. There is no 
database... I think installer better asks this question during 
installation since many users just run a desktop and -y is pretty much 
ok for them.


Thank you again,
Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Polytropon
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:47:38 +0200, "Remko Lodder"  wrote:
> 
> >> Almost every time after improper shutdown (poweroff) and reboot I get
> >> into interactive fsck.
> >>
> >> I am being asked whole bunch of questions to which I just have to answer
> >> Y (what are my other options?)
> >>
> >> Why drop user into interactive fsck if there is not much choice anyways?
> >> Is there a way to set it up the way it doesn't drop into interactive
> >> mode? Like answer 'Y' to all questions?
> >>
> >> Yuri
> 
> I think this might do your trick:
> 
> fsck_y_enable="NO"  # Set to YES to do fsck -y if the initial preen
> fails.
> fsck_y_flags="" # Additional flags for fsck -y
> 
> The reason for this to get interactively is because this  might messup
> with your filesystem, and you are the one responsible for your filesystem,
> not us or the autmated system. So in case you want to "play" with that,
> that's entirely up to you.
> 
> In addition, I can imagine that companies (been there done it) do not want
> to fsck -y by default, this because of the mentioned potential corruption
> and dataloss.

Very important point.

As an addition, allow me to mention

background_fsck="YES"

as an entry in /etc/rc.conf. This will let the system boot up and perform
fsck checks while the system is running - running on a maybe defective or
inconsistent file system. This is dangerous, but possible. It utilizes a
snapshot mechanism which can cause further trouble (lost / emptyinodes
and disappearing subtrees of files).

Personally, if fsck requires YOUR attention, there's usually a reason for
this. The reason is possible data loss or file system corruption where YOU
take the responsibility of decision, not fsck. By default, fsck does not
do damaging, but under strange circumstances, it can happen. For example,
if you want to do a special kind of data recovery or forensic analysis on
a file system, you potentially DO NOT WANT fsck to assume "y" for all the
questions because that can make your job harder.

A common additional "y flag" is -f (means fsck -yf) to force all operations
suggested by fsck and confirming them.



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Peter Boosten
On 15-9-2010 9:07, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> $ sh
> $ echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
> RTFM
> $ bash
> g...@current:/usr/home/guru> echo 
> 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
> RTFM
> 
> which shell you used?

zsh.

Peter

-- 
http://www.boosten.org
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Adam Vande More
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 2:07 AM, Matthias Apitz  wrote:

> El día Wednesday, September 15, 2010 a las 08:59:07AM +0200, Peter Boosten
> escribió:
>
> > On 15-9-2010 8:53, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > > echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
> >
> > LOL, only worked with quotes, btw ;-)
>
> no,
>
> $ sh
> $ echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
> RTFM
> $ bash
> g...@current:/usr/home/guru> echo
> 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
> RTFM
>
> which shell you used?
>

it doesn't work in zsh, csh, tcsh, I didn't try sh, it didn't even occur to
me since I so rarely use it as an interactive shell.

-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Matthias Apitz
El día Wednesday, September 15, 2010 a las 08:59:07AM +0200, Peter Boosten 
escribió:

> On 15-9-2010 8:53, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
> 
> LOL, only worked with quotes, btw ;-)

no,

$ sh
$ echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
RTFM
$ bash
g...@current:/usr/home/guru> echo 
16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
RTFM

which shell you used?

matthias

-- 
Matthias Apitz
t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
e  - w http://www.unixarea.de/
Solidarity with the zionistic pirates of Israel?   Not in my  name!
¿Solidaridad con los piratas sionistas de Israel? ¡No en mi nombre!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Adam Vande More
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Peter Boosten  wrote:

> On 15-9-2010 8:53, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
>
> LOL, only worked with quotes, btw ;-)
>

Depends on the shell, I guess he's a bash user.

-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-15 Thread Peter Boosten
On 15-9-2010 8:53, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc

LOL, only worked with quotes, btw ;-)

Peter

-- 
http://www.boosten.org
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-14 Thread Matthias Apitz
El día Wednesday, September 15, 2010 a las 09:41:54AM +0300, Yuri escribió:

> Almost every time after improper shutdown (poweroff) and reboot I get 
> into interactive fsck.
> 
> I am being asked whole bunch of questions to which I just have to answer 
> Y (what are my other options?)
> 
> Why drop user into interactive fsck if there is not much choice anyways? 
> Is there a way to set it up the way it doesn't drop into interactive 
> mode? Like answer 'Y' to all questions?

Yes, just do:

$ echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D4D465452snlb xq | dc
$ man rc.conf | col -b | fgrep fsck_

In general one should avoid unclean shutdowns. I even after such event
go into single user mode and run fsck(8) by hand.

HIH

matthias

-- 
Matthias Apitz
t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211
e  - w http://www.unixarea.de/
Solidarity with the zionistic pirates of Israel?   Not in my  name!
¿Solidaridad con los piratas sionistas de Israel? ¡No en mi nombre!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-14 Thread Remko Lodder

>> Almost every time after improper shutdown (poweroff) and reboot I get
>> into interactive fsck.
>>
>> I am being asked whole bunch of questions to which I just have to answer
>> Y (what are my other options?)
>>
>> Why drop user into interactive fsck if there is not much choice anyways?
>> Is there a way to set it up the way it doesn't drop into interactive
>> mode? Like answer 'Y' to all questions?
>>
>> Yuri

I think this might do your trick:

fsck_y_enable="NO"  # Set to YES to do fsck -y if the initial preen
fails.
fsck_y_flags="" # Additional flags for fsck -y

The reason for this to get interactively is because this  might messup
with your filesystem, and you are the one responsible for your filesystem,
not us or the autmated system. So in case you want to "play" with that,
that's entirely up to you.

In addition, I can imagine that companies (been there done it) do not want
to fsck -y by default, this because of the mentioned potential corruption
and dataloss.

Thanks
remko

p.s. This was found within 5 seconds in /etc/defaults/rc.conf.

-- 
/"\   Best regards,  | re...@freebsd.org
\ /   Remko Lodder   | re...@efnet
 Xhttp://www.evilcoder.org/  |
/ \   ASCII Ribbon Campaign  | Against HTML Mail and News

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


How to prevent system to launch interactive fsck after improper shutdown and reboot?

2010-09-14 Thread Yuri
Almost every time after improper shutdown (poweroff) and reboot I get 
into interactive fsck.


I am being asked whole bunch of questions to which I just have to answer 
Y (what are my other options?)


Why drop user into interactive fsck if there is not much choice anyways? 
Is there a way to set it up the way it doesn't drop into interactive 
mode? Like answer 'Y' to all questions?


Yuri
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"


Re: improper shutdown

2007-04-04 Thread Eric

John Govender wrote:

hi

can u pls tell me how i can find out the exact time a pc running winXP 
media centre was improperly shut down?


thanks
John



as others have mentioned, this question has nothing to do with FreeBSD, 
but you can check the event log on your XP box to see when the crash 
happened. it is usually logged as 'unexpected shutdown' or something 
similar.


Eric
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: improper shutdown

2007-04-04 Thread Christian Walther

On 04/04/07, John Govender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

hi

can u pls tell me how i can find out the exact time a pc running winXP media
centre was improperly shut down?


FreeBSD is not exactly related to WinXP, so I doubt that someone on
this list is either capable or willing to answer your question. It
would be the best to you to go to some apropiate places (e.g. WinXP
related mailing lists and bulletin boards).



thanks
John

_
Message offline contacts without any fire risk!
http://www.communicationevolved.com/en-za/

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


improper shutdown

2007-04-04 Thread John Govender

hi

can u pls tell me how i can find out the exact time a pc running winXP media 
centre was improperly shut down?


thanks
John

_
Message offline contacts without any fire risk! 
http://www.communicationevolved.com/en-za/


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Kent Stewart
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 12:59 pm, Bill Moran wrote:
> Stijn Hoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:21:40PM -0500, Scott wrote:
> > > As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems
> > > very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition
> > > would make a difference on at what percentage full one would
> > > start to notice problems.
> > >
> > > In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of
> > > work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think
> > > with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher
> > > percentage before trouble started.
> > >
> > > It makes sense to me anyway :)
> >
> > That's what one would like, but UFS doesn't work that way.  It's
> > allocation algorithm assumes 10% of the disk is free -- regardless
> > of actual size. Or so I've been told (multiple times).
> >
> > IMHO this is a bit ridiculous -- I mean, given 1 TB of space
> > (nearly feasible for a home server right now), why would an FS
> > allocator need 10% of that if the files on the volume are averaging
> > 10 MB?
> >
> > But then again, and this is worth noting -- I'm certainly nowhere
> > near as clueful as others on how to design a stable & fast file
> > system.  Seeing as UFS1 is still in use, and has been for the last
> > 20 years (think about it!), I think maybe the tradeoff might make
> > sense to an expert...
> >
> > BTW, note that you really need to consider the perfomance drop for
> > yourself -- like others said, if the files on the volume change
> > infrequently, performance matters little, and space more so.
>
> I think you've missed the point.
>
> The designers of UFS/FFS did not design the filesystem to require 10%
> free space in order to perform well.
>
> They developed the best, fastest (thus the name "fast file system")
> filesystem algorithms they could come up with.
>
> Then, during testing, they found that these algorithms started to
> perform really poorly when the filesystem got really full.  Thinking
> this might be important, they tested further until they knew exactly
> what point the performance started to drop off at.  They then went
> one step further and developed another algorithm in an attempt to
> maintain as much performance as possible even when the filesystem got
> very full.  This is why you'll occasionally see the "switching from
> time to space" message when your filesystem starts to fill up. The
> filesystem drivers are doing their best to degrade gracefully.
>
> Now, I'm not going to say that there is no more that can be done.  I
> think the fact is that the two algorithms work well enough that
> nobody has bothered to invest the research into improving them. 
> (That combined with the fact that disk space keeps getting cheaper
> and cheaper, makes it unlikely that anyone will invest much $$$ into
> researching how to use that last 10% while still maintaining top
> performance).

I really agree with what you said here. With what they paid me an hour 
before I retired, I could buy a large HD. Now 2 hours would buy a 
REALLY large HD. People seem to have the tendancy to bleed the last few 
drops of perfomance or space and, I think that they don't understand 
basic economics. I think this is similar to expecting to do a 
portupgrade -fa on a P-200 in a reasonable amount of time. I saw a 
t-shirt one time about "soaring with eagles when you worked with 
turkeys" I laughed at the time..Now I think that soaring with eagles 
has a price and you just can't do it when your system is on the low end 
performance wise.

My basic system has 3x30GB HDs. Why 30GB? Well, they were the smallest 
ata-133 HDs that I could buy locally. Why 3 HDs?. Processes such as 
buildworld work faster when your locale is spread across 3 HDs.

Kent

-- 
Kent Stewart
Richland, WA

http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Stijn Hoop
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 03:59:00PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote:
> Stijn Hoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:21:40PM -0500, Scott wrote:
> > > As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems 
> > > very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition 
> > > would make a difference on at what percentage full one would 
> > > start to notice problems.
> > > 
> > > In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of 
> > > work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think 
> > > with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher 
> > > percentage before trouble started.
> > > 
> > > It makes sense to me anyway :)
> > 
> > That's what one would like, but UFS doesn't work that way.  It's
> > allocation algorithm assumes 10% of the disk is free -- regardless
> > of actual size. Or so I've been told (multiple times).
> > 
> > IMHO this is a bit ridiculous -- I mean, given 1 TB of space (nearly
> > feasible for a home server right now), why would an FS allocator need
> > 10% of that if the files on the volume are averaging 10 MB?
> > 
> > But then again, and this is worth noting -- I'm certainly nowhere near as
> > clueful as others on how to design a stable & fast file system.  Seeing as
> > UFS1 is still in use, and has been for the last 20 years (think about
> > it!), I think maybe the tradeoff might make sense to an expert...
> > 
> > BTW, note that you really need to consider the perfomance drop for yourself
> > -- like others said, if the files on the volume change infrequently,
> > performance matters little, and space more so.
> 
> I think you've missed the point.

I most certainly do that a lot of the time :)

> The designers of UFS/FFS did not design the filesystem to require 10% free
> space in order to perform well.

OK, I did not know that.

> They developed the best, fastest (thus the name "fast file system") filesystem
> algorithms they could come up with.

That I knew, and still experience every day :)

> Then, during testing, they found that these algorithms started to perform
> really poorly when the filesystem got really full.  Thinking this might be
> important, they tested further until they knew exactly what point the
> performance started to drop off at.  They then went one step further and
> developed another algorithm in an attempt to maintain as much performance
> as possible even when the filesystem got very full.  This is why you'll
> occasionally see the "switching from time to space" message when your
> filesystem starts to fill up. The filesystem drivers are doing their best
> to degrade gracefully.

I understand.

> Now, I'm not going to say that there is no more that can be done.  I think the
> fact is that the two algorithms work well enough that nobody has bothered to
> invest the research into improving them.  (That combined with the fact that
> disk space keeps getting cheaper and cheaper, makes it unlikely that anyone
> will invest much $$$ into researching how to use that last 10% while still
> maintaining top performance).

Well, although disk is cheap, seen absolutely it's still a lot of space that's
"wasted". I do understand the issues, and your posts, this and the previous
reply, have made things clearer -- thanks. 

--Stijn

-- 
"I'm not under the alkafluence of inkahol that some thinkle peep I am.  It's
just the drunker I sit here the longer I get."


pgphV1jJcP3xU.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Bill Moran
Stijn Hoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:21:40PM -0500, Scott wrote:
> > As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems 
> > very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition 
> > would make a difference on at what percentage full one would 
> > start to notice problems.
> > 
> > In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of 
> > work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think 
> > with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher 
> > percentage before trouble started.
> > 
> > It makes sense to me anyway :)
> 
> That's what one would like, but UFS doesn't work that way.  It's allocation
> algorithm assumes 10% of the disk is free -- regardless of actual size. Or so
> I've been told (multiple times).
> 
> IMHO this is a bit ridiculous -- I mean, given 1 TB of space (nearly feasible
> for a home server right now), why would an FS allocator need 10% of that if
> the files on the volume are averaging 10 MB?
> 
> But then again, and this is worth noting -- I'm certainly nowhere near as
> clueful as others on how to design a stable & fast file system.  Seeing as
> UFS1 is still in use, and has been for the last 20 years (think about it!), I
> think maybe the tradeoff might make sense to an expert...
> 
> BTW, note that you really need to consider the perfomance drop for yourself
> -- like others said, if the files on the volume change infrequently,
> performance matters little, and space more so.

I think you've missed the point.

The designers of UFS/FFS did not design the filesystem to require 10% free space
in order to perform well.

They developed the best, fastest (thus the name "fast file system") filesystem
algorithms they could come up with.

Then, during testing, they found that these algorithms started to perform really
poorly when the filesystem got really full.  Thinking this might be important,
they tested further until they knew exactly what point the performance started
to drop off at.  They then went one step further and developed another
algorithm in an attempt to maintain as much performance as possible even when
the filesystem got very full.  This is why you'll occasionally see the
"switching from time to space" message when your filesystem starts to fill up.
The filesystem drivers are doing their best to degrade gracefully.

Now, I'm not going to say that there is no more that can be done.  I think the
fact is that the two algorithms work well enough that nobody has bothered to
invest the research into improving them.  (That combined with the fact that
disk space keeps getting cheaper and cheaper, makes it unlikely that anyone will
invest much $$$ into researching how to use that last 10% while still
maintaining top performance).

-- 
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Stijn Hoop
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:21:40PM -0500, Scott wrote:
> As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems 
> very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition 
> would make a difference on at what percentage full one would 
> start to notice problems.
> 
> In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of 
> work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think 
> with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher 
> percentage before trouble started.
> 
> It makes sense to me anyway :)

That's what one would like, but UFS doesn't work that way.  It's allocation
algorithm assumes 10% of the disk is free -- regardless of actual size. Or so
I've been told (multiple times).

IMHO this is a bit ridiculous -- I mean, given 1 TB of space (nearly feasible
for a home server right now), why would an FS allocator need 10% of that if
the files on the volume are averaging 10 MB?

But then again, and this is worth noting -- I'm certainly nowhere near as
clueful as others on how to design a stable & fast file system.  Seeing as
UFS1 is still in use, and has been for the last 20 years (think about it!), I
think maybe the tradeoff might make sense to an expert...

BTW, note that you really need to consider the perfomance drop for yourself
-- like others said, if the files on the volume change infrequently,
performance matters little, and space more so.

--Stijn

-- 
This sentence contradicts itself -- no actually it doesn't.
-- Hofstadter


pgpQOKPgJOqnR.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Bill Moran
Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems 
> very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition 
> would make a difference on at what percentage full one would 
> start to notice problems.
> 
> In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of 
> work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think 
> with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher 
> percentage before trouble started.

Logical or not, you're wrong.

The point is how hard the FFS algorithms have to search to find
a spot on the disk to put things, and how accessible that spot
is the next time that data is needed to be read.  While 10% of
120G seems like a lot of space, it's still only 10%.  Imagine a
parking lot with only 10% free spots.  If the lot has 1000 spots,
how long do you drive around before you find a _good_ spot?  If
it has a total of 100 spots, how long does it take to find a
_good_ spot?  The analogy isn't perfect, but the point is the
perceived improvement at having a higher number of free spaces
is offset by other factors, and the rule of 90% free stands
no matter what size the drive.

Newer drives with bigger caches, higher rotational speeds and
lower seek times are much more likely to change this percentage
than the physical size of the drive.

> It makes sense to me anyway :)
> Scott
> 
>  | It is mentioned as a recommendation.  It
>  | is not an absolute. Do a little searching
>  | and you will probably find some
>  | references. We have some that run in to
>  | the 90-s most of the time too.  It depends
>  | on what you are actually doing.   If it is
>  | a fairly stable collection of data that
>  | doesn't get a lot written to it most of
>  | the time, it shouldn't matter.   If it is
>  | very volatile - lots of files come and go,
>  | then it could make a bigger difference.
>  | Unless it gets to the 100% mark (except
>  | for root) with that 100% being with the
>  | set-aside already taken out, it shouldn't
>  | cause anything to crash.
>  
> 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


-- 
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Scott
Hi,

As a newbie to FreeBSD, I may be way off base, but it seems
very logical to me that the size of your drive or partition
would make a difference on at what percentage full one would
start to notice problems.

In terms of megs/gigs 80% of 120 gigs still has a lot of
work space left. 80% of 4 gigs is not much. I would think
with a larger drive/partition, one could run at a higher
percentage before trouble started.

It makes sense to me anyway :)
Scott

 | It is mentioned as a recommendation.  It
 | is not an absolute. Do a little searching
 | and you will probably find some
 | references. We have some that run in to
 | the 90-s most of the time too.  It depends
 | on what you are actually doing.   If it is
 | a fairly stable collection of data that
 | doesn't get a lot written to it most of
 | the time, it shouldn't matter.   If it is
 | very volatile - lots of files come and go,
 | then it could make a bigger difference.
 | Unless it gets to the 100% mark (except
 | for root) with that 100% being with the
 | set-aside already taken out, it shouldn't
 | cause anything to crash.


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Randy Pratt
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:45:06 -0400 (EDT)
Jerry McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > 
> > On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:05:43 +0800
> > Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > > > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I
> > > > correct this? Any good reading material? 
> > > 
> > > FreeBSD will defragment itself without any action from the user.
> > > However, defragmentation requires some blank space, and (ideally) you
> > > should not let any partition get more than 80% full. You can check on
> > > that with "df -h":
> > 
> > I've been running partitions well over 90% for over six years on
> > FreeBSD and have not seen any problems with doing so.
> > 
> > Do you have a FreeBSD documentation reference for that 80% figure?
> 
> It is mentioned as a recommendation.  It is not an absolute.
> Do a little searching and you will probably find some references.
> We have some that run in to the 90-s most of the time too.  It
> depends on what you are actually doing.   If it is a fairly stable
> collection of data that doesn't get a lot written to it most of
> the time, it shouldn't matter.   If it is very volatile - lots of
> files come and go, then it could make a bigger difference.  Unless
> it gets to the 100% mark (except for root) with that 100% being with
> the set-aside already taken out, it shouldn't cause anything to crash.

While most of the data/files are stable, there's probably a few
Gigs that come and go with fair regularity.  I update the box
very frequently (ports, docs and sources) so that adds to the
churning I'm sure.

I'll start watching for any performance hits the next time it gets
over 95% full.  I'm just a bit surprised that I've not noticed
anything.

Thanks for the response.  Much appreciated.

Best regards,

Randy

> jerry
> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Randy
> > 
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> df -h
> > > FilesystemSize   Used  Avail Capacity  Mounted on
> > > /dev/ad0s2a   248M68M   160M30%/
> > > devfs 1.0K   1.0K 0B   100%/dev
> > > /dev/ad0s2g   2.4G   281M   1.9G13%/home
> > > /dev/ad0s2e   248M   1.2M   227M 1%/tmp
> > > /dev/ad0s2f   8.7G   2.4G   5.6G30%/usr
> > > /dev/ad0s2d   248M17M   211M 8%/var
> > > 
> > > The column labeled "Capacity" tells you the percentage of space being
> > > consumed - over 80% would be bad. Note that the "devfs" uses 100% (on
> > > FBSD 5.x, it doesn't exist on 4.x) - that's no problem, it's not a
> > > partition and it will always be 100%.
> > > 
> > > regards,
> > > Robert
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > ___
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> > 
> 


-- 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-09 Thread Randy Pratt
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:36:52 -0400
Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Randy Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:05:43 +0800
> > Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > > > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I
> > > > correct this? Any good reading material? 
> > > 
> > > FreeBSD will defragment itself without any action from the user.
> > > However, defragmentation requires some blank space, and (ideally) you
> > > should not let any partition get more than 80% full. You can check on
> > > that with "df -h":
> > 
> > I've been running partitions well over 90% for over six years on
> > FreeBSD and have not seen any problems with doing so.
> > 
> > Do you have a FreeBSD documentation reference for that 80% figure?
> 
> man tunefs
> 
> See, in particular, the section on the -m option, which describes (in brief)
> the known performance problems and how FreeBSD reacts.

My minfree space is at the default of 8% and the man page says this
is space held back from normal users.  Is that 8% also held back
from the df output?  I'm thinking that it is since I've seen posts
where users have greater than 100% showing in their df output.

I was interpreting the 80% number being applied to the numbers
shown by df.  If its 98% as shown by df 
(8% minfree + 2% more = 10% of total disk capacity), then that isn't
too bad.  I think I'm under that most of the time.

Would the total disk size start to come into play at some point?
10% of an 8G disk is a whole lot smaller than 10% of a 200G disk.

Thanks for the pointer too!

Best regards,

Randy

> Robert's numbers aren't quite right.  The point at which performance starts to
> suck is 90% full.
> 
> You won't have any _problems_, it's just that performance will degrade,
> according to the man page, up to 3x slower.
> 
> -- 
> Bill Moran
> Potential Technologies
> http://www.potentialtech.com


-- 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot

2004-06-09 Thread Jerry McAllister
> 
> On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:05:43 +0800
> Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I
> > > correct this? Any good reading material? 
> > 
> > FreeBSD will defragment itself without any action from the user.
> > However, defragmentation requires some blank space, and (ideally) you
> > should not let any partition get more than 80% full. You can check on
> > that with "df -h":
> 
> I've been running partitions well over 90% for over six years on
> FreeBSD and have not seen any problems with doing so.
> 
> Do you have a FreeBSD documentation reference for that 80% figure?

It is mentioned as a recommendation.  It is not an absolute.
Do a little searching and you will probably find some references.
We have some that run in to the 90-s most of the time too.  It
depends on what you are actually doing.   If it is a fairly stable
collection of data that doesn't get a lot written to it most of
the time, it shouldn't matter.   If it is very volatile - lots of
files come and go, then it could make a bigger difference.  Unless
it gets to the 100% mark (except for root) with that 100% being with
the set-aside already taken out, it shouldn't cause anything to crash.

jerry

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Randy
> 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> df -h
> > FilesystemSize   Used  Avail Capacity  Mounted on
> > /dev/ad0s2a   248M68M   160M30%/
> > devfs 1.0K   1.0K 0B   100%/dev
> > /dev/ad0s2g   2.4G   281M   1.9G13%/home
> > /dev/ad0s2e   248M   1.2M   227M 1%/tmp
> > /dev/ad0s2f   8.7G   2.4G   5.6G30%/usr
> > /dev/ad0s2d   248M17M   211M 8%/var
> > 
> > The column labeled "Capacity" tells you the percentage of space being
> > consumed - over 80% would be bad. Note that the "devfs" uses 100% (on
> > FBSD 5.x, it doesn't exist on 4.x) - that's no problem, it's not a
> > partition and it will always be 100%.
> > 
> > regards,
> > Robert
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> 

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-09 Thread Bill Moran
Randy Pratt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:05:43 +0800
> Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I
> > > correct this? Any good reading material? 
> > 
> > FreeBSD will defragment itself without any action from the user.
> > However, defragmentation requires some blank space, and (ideally) you
> > should not let any partition get more than 80% full. You can check on
> > that with "df -h":
> 
> I've been running partitions well over 90% for over six years on
> FreeBSD and have not seen any problems with doing so.
> 
> Do you have a FreeBSD documentation reference for that 80% figure?

man tunefs

See, in particular, the section on the -m option, which describes (in brief)
the known performance problems and how FreeBSD reacts.

Robert's numbers aren't quite right.  The point at which performance starts to
suck is 90% full.

You won't have any _problems_, it's just that performance will degrade,
according to the man page, up to 3x slower.

-- 
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-09 Thread Randy Pratt
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:05:43 +0800
Robert Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I
> > correct this? Any good reading material? 
> 
> FreeBSD will defragment itself without any action from the user.
> However, defragmentation requires some blank space, and (ideally) you
> should not let any partition get more than 80% full. You can check on
> that with "df -h":

I've been running partitions well over 90% for over six years on
FreeBSD and have not seen any problems with doing so.

Do you have a FreeBSD documentation reference for that 80% figure?

Thanks,

Randy

> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> df -h
> FilesystemSize   Used  Avail Capacity  Mounted on
> /dev/ad0s2a   248M68M   160M30%/
> devfs 1.0K   1.0K 0B   100%/dev
> /dev/ad0s2g   2.4G   281M   1.9G13%/home
> /dev/ad0s2e   248M   1.2M   227M 1%/tmp
> /dev/ad0s2f   8.7G   2.4G   5.6G30%/usr
> /dev/ad0s2d   248M17M   211M 8%/var
> 
> The column labeled "Capacity" tells you the percentage of space being
> consumed - over 80% would be bad. Note that the "devfs" uses 100% (on
> FBSD 5.x, it doesn't exist on 4.x) - that's no problem, it's not a
> partition and it will always be 100%.
> 
> regards,
> Robert
> 
> 


-- 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-08 Thread Thomas Farrell
Sometimes  the power goes out and my machine shuts off . when I power it
backup it fails at check root file system. and drops me into a shell I run
fsck /dev/da0s1a   and answer yes to fixing of fragmented inodes.  figure
out what drive/partition root is mounted of  by typing df and then run fsck
on it.

ssigc# df
Filesystem  1K-blocks UsedAvail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/da0s1a   1813422  1323568   344478239%/
ssigc#fsck /dev/da0s1a


- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 2:01 AM
Subject: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs


> I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
> this? Any good reading material? Also, what should I do when I shutdown
> my system incorrectly and boot up again? Last questions! I promise. Is
> there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
> Probably, a log file.
>
> Thanks guys,
> Bruce
>
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
>


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-08 Thread Robert Storey

> I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I
> correct this? Any good reading material? 

FreeBSD will defragment itself without any action from the user.
However, defragmentation requires some blank space, and (ideally) you
should not let any partition get more than 80% full. You can check on
that with "df -h":

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> df -h
FilesystemSize   Used  Avail Capacity  Mounted on
/dev/ad0s2a   248M68M   160M30%/
devfs 1.0K   1.0K 0B   100%/dev
/dev/ad0s2g   2.4G   281M   1.9G13%/home
/dev/ad0s2e   248M   1.2M   227M 1%/tmp
/dev/ad0s2f   8.7G   2.4G   5.6G30%/usr
/dev/ad0s2d   248M17M   211M 8%/var

The column labeled "Capacity" tells you the percentage of space being
consumed - over 80% would be bad. Note that the "devfs" uses 100% (on
FBSD 5.x, it doesn't exist on 4.x) - that's no problem, it's not a
partition and it will always be 100%.

regards,
Robert


___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-08 Thread Jerry McAllister
> 
> I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
> this? Any good reading material? 

Do not correct it.   It is not at all the same thing as fragmentation
in Microsloth systems and is not a problem.   There are some papers
on the topic and I seem to remember something written up, maybe on
onlamp.com or somewhere like that, that explain it fairly well.  Do
a little searching on UFS, FFS and fragmentation to accumulate some info.

>   Also, what should I do when I shutdown
> my system incorrectly and boot up again? 

Use the "shutdown"(8) command to shut the system down.
If it goes down improperly, such as in a power failure, generally
the standard fsck(8) during the subsequent boot will take care 
of it.   It is possible that a file or two gets too mangled or
the root file system in unclean and then it will ask you to run fsck
manually.   Generally, then it will dump you right in to single user 
mode, but if not, then boot to single user mode and then run 'fsck -f'
on each file system it can automatically recover starting with root (/)
You may have to do some 'y' responses or if it is so much it is onerrous,
then do  'fsck -fy' and it will assume a 'y' at every point.
Then, when it is all cleaned up, just reboot.   On rare occasions I have
had to do the process twice.  But anything more than that is a strong
indicator that the hard drive itself is the problem and it is failing
and only a replacement will solve the problem.

> Last questions! I promise. Is
> there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
> Probably, a log file.

The "dmesg"(8) command will normally print out what you need.
If the system has been up too long for it to go back far enough, 
then look in the file:   "/var/run/dmesg.boot"

jerry

> 
> Thanks guys,
> Bruce
> 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-08 Thread Bill Moran
[It's not generally good policy to ask multiple questions in one email.  As
crazy as it sounds, you're better off sending a seperate email for each
question.  See http://www.lemis.com/questions.html]

Bruce Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> This is off topic, I was wondering if there is a pretty little gui that
> will run when booting. Kinda like windows, lindows, and even Redhat
> Fedora has one; which can be switched back and forth. Basically, so I
> don't have to see the text scrolling down and just see a loader with %.
> Maybe in the ports collection? If not I might have write one. :oP

See the various documents on boot splash screens.  "man splash" on your
FreeBSD system is the best reference I know of, although a google search is
likely to turn up more.

I don't know of anything more advanced than that.  You may have to write it ;)

> Oh, and thanks for your comments/answers. One last question thought? How
> do I get rid of that fragmentation crap? Just for shits and giggles..
> ;o)

Just keep using your system.  UFS manages fragmentation during normal usage.

However, fragmentation is not what you think it is.  If you tried to evaluate
a UFS file system compared to Windows idea of fragmentation, it would look
fragmented as hell, but UFS does this in a controlled manner that is intended
to maintain high-performance, and "correcting" it would actually be counter-
productive.  UFS fragmentation is the act of breaking down storage units into
smaller ones to accomodate files of uneven sizes, and I don't know of any
way to prevent this other than deleting such files.

See /usr/share/doc/papers/diskperf.ascii.gz for a more technical explanation
of how things work.

> 
> Bruce
> 
> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 02:09, Murray Taylor wrote:
> > Fragmentation is a non-event in 99.999% of cases. It is nothing like 
> > micro$lop fragments and (before you ask, no there is no defrag tool,
> > 'cos it is not required)
> > 
> > The shutdown question -- well you should not shutdown incorrectly ;-)
> > - see man shutdown   and friends
> > (BTW - letting the FreeBSD box run and run and run wont hurt anything.
> > I'm currently up to 72 days uptime since I last updated the system, and
> > we had a machine that got to 698 days here at work .. we had to move
> > buildings and thus shut it down..)
> > 
> > for the last question the file you want is 
> > 
> > /var/run/dmesg.boot
> > 
> > which is the boot output from the most recent boot.
> > 
> > You can also see it by issuing the command 
> > dmesg
> > but the display that this one shows can get over written as the system
> > does other log messages.
> > 
> > Hope this helps
> > mjt
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 16:01, Bruce Hunter wrote:
> > > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
> > > this? Any good reading material? Also, what should I do when I shutdown
> > > my system incorrectly and boot up again? Last questions! I promise. Is
> > > there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
> > > Probably, a log file.
> > > 
> > > Thanks guys,
> > > Bruce
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.
> > > 
> 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


-- 
Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
http://www.potentialtech.com
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-08 Thread Jason Stewart
On 08/06/04 02:21 -0400, Bruce Hunter wrote:
> This is off topic, I was wondering if there is a pretty little gui that
> will run when booting. Kinda like windows, lindows, and even Redhat
> Fedora has one; which can be switched back and forth. Basically, so I
> don't have to see the text scrolling down and just see a loader with %.
> Maybe in the ports collection? If not I might have write one. :oP

Hi Bruce,
Here are the first 2 google results for 'FreeBSD boot splash'
http://www.baldwin.cx/splash/
http://students.seattleu.edu/hodeleri/FreeBSD/boot.html

If you want a graphical boot manager, install grub from ports. This is
the boot manager that most Linux distros use, and it's easy to insert
your own nifty splash screen in the background.
 
> Oh, and thanks for your comments/answers. One last question thought? How
> do I get rid of that fragmentation crap? Just for shits and giggles..
> ;o)
> 
> Bruce

Why would you want to? I imagine that you would change the source
somewhere in /usr/src/sys. I'm not intimate with the source other than
your basic make world, so I couldn't tell you where.

One other thing that was not mentioned is that the FreeBSD kernel will
change the way files are stored on disk if it notices that the fs is
getting too fragmented. You will see some kernel message like '/kernel
fs: optimization changed from TIME to SPACE'. When the fs is no longer
fragmented the kernel switches back to the time optimization. I don't
really remember the exact message, since I haven't seen it in a while. 

Cheers,
Jason

> 
> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 02:09, Murray Taylor wrote:
> > Fragmentation is a non-event in 99.999% of cases. It is nothing like 
> > micro$lop fragments and (before you ask, no there is no defrag tool,
> > 'cos it is not required)
> > 
> > The shutdown question -- well you should not shutdown incorrectly ;-)
> > - see man shutdown   and friends
> > (BTW - letting the FreeBSD box run and run and run wont hurt anything.
> > I'm currently up to 72 days uptime since I last updated the system, and
> > we had a machine that got to 698 days here at work .. we had to move
> > buildings and thus shut it down..)
> > 
> > for the last question the file you want is 
> > 
> > /var/run/dmesg.boot
> > 
> > which is the boot output from the most recent boot.
> > 
> > You can also see it by issuing the command 
> > dmesg
> > but the display that this one shows can get over written as the system
> > does other log messages.
> > 
> > Hope this helps
> > mjt
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 16:01, Bruce Hunter wrote:
> > > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
> > > this? Any good reading material? Also, what should I do when I shutdown
> > > my system incorrectly and boot up again? Last questions! I promise. Is
> > > there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
> > > Probably, a log file.
> > > 
> > > Thanks guys,
> > > Bruce
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.
> > > 
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-07 Thread Bruce Hunter
This is off topic, I was wondering if there is a pretty little gui that
will run when booting. Kinda like windows, lindows, and even Redhat
Fedora has one; which can be switched back and forth. Basically, so I
don't have to see the text scrolling down and just see a loader with %.
Maybe in the ports collection? If not I might have write one. :oP

Oh, and thanks for your comments/answers. One last question thought? How
do I get rid of that fragmentation crap? Just for shits and giggles..
;o)

Bruce

On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 02:09, Murray Taylor wrote:
> Fragmentation is a non-event in 99.999% of cases. It is nothing like 
> micro$lop fragments and (before you ask, no there is no defrag tool,
> 'cos it is not required)
> 
> The shutdown question -- well you should not shutdown incorrectly ;-)
> - see man shutdown   and friends
> (BTW - letting the FreeBSD box run and run and run wont hurt anything.
> I'm currently up to 72 days uptime since I last updated the system, and
> we had a machine that got to 698 days here at work .. we had to move
> buildings and thus shut it down..)
> 
> for the last question the file you want is 
> 
> /var/run/dmesg.boot
> 
> which is the boot output from the most recent boot.
> 
> You can also see it by issuing the command 
> dmesg
> but the display that this one shows can get over written as the system
> does other log messages.
> 
> Hope this helps
> mjt
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 16:01, Bruce Hunter wrote:
> > I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> > system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
> > this? Any good reading material? Also, what should I do when I shutdown
> > my system incorrectly and boot up again? Last questions! I promise. Is
> > there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
> > Probably, a log file.
> > 
> > Thanks guys,
> > Bruce
> > 
> > ___
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> > 
> > 
> > This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.
> > 

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Re: Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-07 Thread Murray Taylor
Fragmentation is a non-event in 99.999% of cases. It is nothing like 
micro$lop fragments and (before you ask, no there is no defrag tool,
'cos it is not required)

The shutdown question -- well you should not shutdown incorrectly ;-)
- see man shutdown   and friends
(BTW - letting the FreeBSD box run and run and run wont hurt anything.
I'm currently up to 72 days uptime since I last updated the system, and
we had a machine that got to 698 days here at work .. we had to move
buildings and thus shut it down..)

for the last question the file you want is 

/var/run/dmesg.boot

which is the boot output from the most recent boot.

You can also see it by issuing the command 
dmesg
but the display that this one shows can get over written as the system
does other log messages.

Hope this helps
mjt


On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 16:01, Bruce Hunter wrote:
> I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
> system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
> this? Any good reading material? Also, what should I do when I shutdown
> my system incorrectly and boot up again? Last questions! I promise. Is
> there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
> Probably, a log file.
> 
> Thanks guys,
> Bruce
> 
> ___
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> 
> 
> This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.
> 
-- 
Murray Taylor
Special Projects Engineer
-
Bytecraft Systems & Entertainment
P: +61 3 8710 2555
F: +61 3 8710 2599
D: +61 3 9238 4275
M: +61 417 319 256
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit us on the web
http://www.bytecraftsystems.com
http://www.bytecraftentertainment.com




This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal.

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"


Improper shutdown of system / Fragmentation Problems / Boot logs

2004-06-07 Thread Bruce Hunter
I am kinda new to FBSD, still kinda learning stuff. Anyway, when my
system boots i see all kinda fragmentation information. How do I correct
this? Any good reading material? Also, what should I do when I shutdown
my system incorrectly and boot up again? Last questions! I promise. Is
there a file that shows the data printed to screen durning boot?
Probably, a log file.

Thanks guys,
Bruce

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"