Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:58:40 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: GH <grasshacker@over-yonder.net> Cc: questions@freebsd.org, "Jerry Murdock" <jmurdock@itraktech.com> Subject: Re: Softupdates Negatives? Message-ID: <15188.21152.724481.930384@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <8807778@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
GH <grasshacker@over-yonder.net> types: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 08:11:22PM -0400, some SMTP stream spewed forth: > > Is there any reason NOT to use softupdates? > > > > Everything I've read is only positive, save a couple of warnings in a 7/2000 > > readme about chronically full file systems and multiple processes deleting > > large numbers of files. Neither of these would apply. > One of the reasons is less certainty of integrity than async or > sync sync. Isn't that half backwards? I thought softupdates had better integrity than async, though not as good as sync. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15188.21152.724481.930384>