Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:35:00 +0300 (EEST) From: Alexander Litvin <archer@lucky.net> To: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NOTICE: Softupdates Message-ID: <199805180635.JAA02653@grape.carrier.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.980517103049.17761D-100000@current1.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <Pine.BSF.3.95.980517103049.17761D-100000@current1.whistle.com> you wrote:
> just by chance.. you don't have a process running 'sync; sync'
> trying to be "safe" do you? if so it's a bad idea..
BTW, why? Well, do you mean 'bad idea' because it slows the system,
or because it may be a reason for crash? If the second, does it mean
that sync is not safe with softupdates?
> On Sun, 17 May 1998, Philippe Regnauld wrote:
>> Julian Elischer writes:
>> >
>> > the inode. This is still a lot safer than the old 'sync'
>> > code but it does indicate that people should not just 'trust it blindly'.
>>
>> Safer is a relative POV :-)
>> It still barfs quite regularly over the fs when I run make
>> world -- this is with SMP.
>>
>> More on this tonight (when I restore /usr/src for the Nth time :-)
>>
>> --
>> -[ Philippe Regnauld / sysadmin / regnauld@deepo.prosa.dk / +55.4N +11.3E ]-
>> «Pluto placed his bad dog at the entrance of Hades to keep the dead
>> IN and the living OUT! The archetypical corporate firewall?»
--
Litvin Alexander
No SIGNATURE available at this run-level
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199805180635.JAA02653>