From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jul 17 7:58:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-27-141-144.mmcable.com [24.27.141.144]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 492C637B408 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 07:58:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 94866 invoked by uid 100); 17 Jul 2001 14:58:40 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15188.21152.724481.930384@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 09:58:40 -0500 To: GH Cc: questions@freebsd.org, "Jerry Murdock" Subject: Re: Softupdates Negatives? In-Reply-To: <8807778@toto.iv> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG GH 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. 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