headers
Andrew Reilly | 17 Mar 2003 04:45
Picon

mount_smbfs in FreeBSD-STABLE

Hi Boris,

Firstly, enormous thanks for getting mount_smbfs going in the first
place: it's tremendously useful.

I have three questions, though, two of which may not be the domain of
mount_smbfs at all:

1) Is it possible to use fstab for smbfs mounts when the name of the
filesystem to be mounted contains a space?  I haven't figured out how to
escape a space there, yet.

2) Is it possible to use amd or something similar to auto-mount
smbfs/cifs file systems?

3) Is it possible to have mount_smbfs authenticate with a windows domain
login, rather than a workgrop login?

Thanks in advance,

--

-- 
Andrew Reilly <areilly <at> bigpond.net.au>

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Conrad Minshall | 17 Mar 2003 08:43
Picon
Favicon

Re: mount_smbfs in FreeBSD-STABLE

For item 1)...  the SMB URL definition allows %nn escapes, as usual.
So if the FreeBSD version of mount_smbfs supports it, you can specify
spaces with a "%20".  If it doesn't support it, you might drop an
"unpercent" function into mount_smbfs.  Here's such a function...
"Darwin" has more source code context if it is needed...

/*
  * Removes the "%" escape sequences from a URL component.
  * See IETF RFC 2396.
  */
char *
unpercent(char * component)
{
         unsigned char c, *s;
         unsigned hi, lo;

         if (component)
                 for (s = component; (c = *s); s++) {
                         if (c != '%')
                                 continue;
                         if ((hi = xtoi(s[1])) > 15 || (lo = xtoi(s[2])) 
 > 15)
                                 continue; /* ignore invalid escapes */
                         s[0] = hi*16 + lo;
                         /*
                          * This was strcpy(s + 1, s + 3);
                          * But nowadays leftward overlapping copies are
                          * officially undefined in C.  Ours seems to
                          * work or not depending upon alignment.
                          */
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Petri Helenius | 17 Mar 2003 16:48
Picon
Picon

md


Is it possible to allocate a file to be used as swap as /dev/md0 and then
allocate a filesystem (namely /tmp) with /dev/md1 with backingstore set to swap?

Trying this hung the system on seemingly infinite disk wait. 

Pete

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Poul-Henning Kamp | 17 Mar 2003 17:17
Picon
Favicon

Re: md

In message <008601c2ec9c$9ea015e0$932a40c1 <at> PHE>, "Petri Helenius" writes:
>
>Is it possible to allocate a file to be used as swap as /dev/md0 and then
>allocate a filesystem (namely /tmp) with /dev/md1 with backingstore set to swap?
>
>Trying this hung the system on seemingly infinite disk wait. 

Once you start to do things like this, you usually get what you ask
for :-)

That said, in theory you should not get into trouble this way, but there
may be something I overlook...

--

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk <at> FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Petri Helenius | 17 Mar 2003 19:34
Picon
Picon

Re: md

>
> Once you start to do things like this, you usually get what you ask
> for :-)

This kind of happened since I first configured more swap from a file and were
happy for a while. Then I realized that I´m running out of space in /tmp
(which used to be swap-backed memory filesystem in the 4.X days)
and did the obvious, generate swap based memory filesystem.
>
> That said, in theory you should not get into trouble this way, but there
> may be something I overlook...
>
As a datapoint, I have some swap which is "regular" swap (256M) and
then 2G off a file.

Pete

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Julian Elischer | 17 Mar 2003 21:22

Anyone working on fsck?


Is there anyone working on fsck?
Recent timings with a fast machine with 1TB filesystems
show that it takes abuot 6 hours to fsck such a filesystem
(on a fast array with a lot of RAM)

This is with a version of fsck that already has some locally developed
speedups and changes. I have not dared time the standard one yet.

Pass 1 takes 2 hours on its own. but the cpu is only about 5% busy.
Looking at the access patterns on the drive suggests that there MAY be
some chance to speed this up using such things reading in teh active
cylinder group in advance, and performing the indirect block checks
in another thread/process.

Does anyone have any plans to work on this sort of thing?

On another issue:
The memory requirements for fsck are about 700MB+ per TB of filesystem
on FreeBSD4.x

With the advent of UFS2 this increases, and the filesyste,s can also get
bigger. 
This means that a 2+TB UFS2 filesystem will be IMPOSSIBLE to check
on an i386 machine.
One solution is to implement an "offline, non-in-place" filesystem
checker using all those techniques we all learned in CS101
relating to mag-tape merge sorts etc.

basically you'd have to have a small disk partition set asside
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alfred Perlstein | 17 Mar 2003 21:33

Re: Anyone working on fsck?

* Julian Elischer <julian <at> elischer.org> [030317 12:22] wrote:
> 
> Is there anyone working on fsck?
> Recent timings with a fast machine with 1TB filesystems
> show that it takes abuot 6 hours to fsck such a filesystem
> (on a fast array with a lot of RAM)
> 
> This is with a version of fsck that already has some locally developed
> speedups and changes. I have not dared time the standard one yet.

Is this with or without the intentional delay introduced in order
to avoid monopolizing the disk in background mode?

-Alfred

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Julian Elischer | 17 Mar 2003 21:40

Re: Anyone working on fsck?

this is a full 100% forground fsck -y

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Alfred Perlstein wrote:

> * Julian Elischer <julian <at> elischer.org> [030317 12:22] wrote:
> > 
> > Is there anyone working on fsck?
> > Recent timings with a fast machine with 1TB filesystems
> > show that it takes abuot 6 hours to fsck such a filesystem
> > (on a fast array with a lot of RAM)
> > 
> > This is with a version of fsck that already has some locally developed
> > speedups and changes. I have not dared time the standard one yet.
> 
> Is this with or without the intentional delay introduced in order
> to avoid monopolizing the disk in background mode?
> 
> -Alfred
> 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Julian Elischer | 17 Mar 2003 21:45

Re: Anyone working on fsck?

I might add that the test filesystem was 95% full with about 8,000,000
directories on it. It was populated with multiple copies of /bin 
and /etc as a test set :-)

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:

> this is a full 100% forground fsck -y
> 
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> 
> > * Julian Elischer <julian <at> elischer.org> [030317 12:22] wrote:
> > > 
> > > Is there anyone working on fsck?
> > > Recent timings with a fast machine with 1TB filesystems
> > > show that it takes abuot 6 hours to fsck such a filesystem
> > > (on a fast array with a lot of RAM)
> > > 
> > > This is with a version of fsck that already has some locally developed
> > > speedups and changes. I have not dared time the standard one yet.
> > 
> > Is this with or without the intentional delay introduced in order
> > to avoid monopolizing the disk in background mode?
> > 
> > -Alfred
> > 
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo <at> FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Miguel Mendez | 17 Mar 2003 21:59
X-Face

Re: Anyone working on fsck?

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 12:22:33 -0800 (PST)
Julian Elischer <julian <at> elischer.org> wrote:

Howdy,

> It wouldn;t be super fast but at least it COULD be used to check a  > 30TB array, where the in-memory version
would beed a process VM space > of 24MB which is clearly impossible on a x86.

I'm sure most of us have computers with more than 24MB :-P, sorry couldn't resist.

It's an interesting problem anyway, does anyone have insight on how other OSs and FS handle these kind of
problems? e.g. Solaris with vxfs or Linux with XFS/JFS/this week's FS.

Cheers,
--

-- 
        Miguel Mendez - flynn <at> energyhq.homeip.net
        GPG Public Key :: http://energyhq.homeip.net/files/pubkey.txt
        EnergyHQ :: http://www.energyhq.tk
        Of course it runs NetBSD!
	Tired of Spam? -> http://www.trustic.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane