Clint Pachl wrote: > > So softdep can definitely enhance performance. And according to Kirk > McKusick, it also enhances FS consistency. So I think I'll be enabling > softdep on my production servers. > > I'm sure all the bugs in that "complex" softdep code have been worked > out by now. ;-)
softdep will occasionally bite it in two circumstances: 1. IO error. (not really an occasionally; if there's an error, you're dead.) 2. softdep gets too far behind. think untarring 20 copies of ports.tgz and running rm -rf in parallel. if you slow disks, the dependency chain grows and grows. over the years, lots of fixes have been made, but this is where the trouble lies. ironically, fast disks like SSD are least likely to fall behind. softdep is probably safest on SSD.
