Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.development.system Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.bhp.com.au!mel.dit.csiro.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.uoknor.edu!news.nodak.edu!netnews1.nwnet.net!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!uhog.mit.edu!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!news1!not-for-mail From: root@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) Subject: Re: The better (more suitable)Unix?? FreeBSD or Linux X-Nntp-Posting-Host: dyson.iquest.net Message-ID: <4fg8dk$fs@dyson.iquest.net> Sender: news@iquest.net (News Admin) Organization: John S. Dyson's home machine References: <4er9hp$5ng@orb.direct.ca> <DMD8rr.oIB@isil.lloke.dna.fi> <4f9skh$2og@dyson.iquest.net> <4fd8sc$cep@daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu> Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 19:48:04 GMT Lines: 32 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:13543 comp.os.linux.development.system:17034 In article <4fd8sc$cep@daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu>, BENJAMIN A LINDSTROM <bl03@uwrf.edu> wrote: >: Linux is more vulnerable to filesystem problems due to the delayed writes >: of metadata (and is the reason that FreeBSD is slower on file >: create/delete benchmarks.) We added an async option to our FSes to make >: the system perform much faster, but with similar risk as Linux has. The >: fsck's at night are a *mistake* and should be removed. >: >The vulnerablity must be in tolerable range. I've yet to lost information >with Linux, except on a "known" unstable harddrive (It was something we >used in one of our machines, and tiptoped around it...OS changes would >not have made a different) In that case, you could use FreeBSD with the filesystems mounted async. It has been historical policy to be very conservative. There is really good stuff being done to make a hardened higher metadata performance UFS with the same reliabilty as the current one. The -current UFS code with filesystems mounted async is a godsend to those doing massive filebackups/restores, etc though. If the new code doesn't come available before the 2.2 freeze, there will be even better async code with the standard UFS forthcoming (it is sitting in one of my trees right now.) But this other work would be done by someone who is much more a FS expert than me -- so I defer to him. It is likely with the stability of both Linux and FreeBSD, and the advent of low-cost good quality UPSes, the issue of sync vs. async filesystems is becoming less of a bother, except in mission critical applications. John Dyson dyson@freebsd.org