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