Sysinstall automatic filesystem size generation.

[Chuck Swiger]

Matthias Buelow wrote:
> Chuck Swiger wrote:
>>PS: Haven't we had this conversation before?
> 
> Yes, indeed, and I don't want to reopen that issue since that would
> lead to no new insights (and since I don't have the time atm. to
> contribute anything I couldn't provide any stuff myself).

Yet you seem willing to spend time discussing the matter...?

> I was just refuting the claim of "very robust" filesystem when power goes
> out in the context of 200GB consumer-grade hardware that this thread
> was talking about.

Most of the time, a FreeBSD system will come back up without losing data older 
than about thirty seconds, and that is tunable.  Have you even tried to change 
the syncer sysctls I mentioned?

> I think until a satisfactory solution can be
> found (by making softupdates and/or a journalled filesystem as
> reliable as possible through mechanisms like write-request barriers
> and appropriate flushing at these) users who're running FreeBSD on
> end-consumer hardware (desktop PC as workstation or personal server)
> should be warned that softupdates does NOT work as described on
> their hardware and that the filesystem can easily be corrupted when
> the power goes out, no matter if softupdates is enabled or not.

Great.  I think "man ata" already says exactly this:

      hw.ata.wc
      set to 1 to enable Write Caching, 0 to disable (default is enabled).
      WARNING: can cause data loss on power failures.

If your hard drive no longer works correctly when write-caching is disabled, 
it's defective.  Nothing FreeBSD or any other system can do is going to change 
that.

> One often sees the "softupdates" argument being fielded by FreeBSD
> advocates, typically against Linux users with journalled fs, on web
> forums, usenet and other less authoritative (and knowledgable)
> places of discussion, and it is often presented as if it were some
> kind of magic bullet that makes filesystem corruption impossible.

"Often?"  Strawman test: can you point out 3 examples by message-id or URL?

And if you prefer to run a journalled filesystem under Linux instead of 
softupdates under FreeBSD, by all means, do whatever makes you happy.

> This simply is not so.

Very good.

-- 
-Chuck

PS: I don't want a thread to end on a negative note.  It would be useful if 
FreeBSD had a more adaptable method for dealing with drive power management and 
caching; in particular, for laptops it might be nice to cache data for much 
longer-- perhaps even hours-- if nothing fsync()s, in order to permit the drive 
to spin down.

(This is something both Windows and MacOS X are learning to do pretty well.)