Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:51:07 +0100 From: nik@iii.co.uk To: Wes Peters <softweyr@xmission.com> Cc: Ken McKittrick <agent47@baldcom.net>, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mount -o asynch = better performance ??????? Message-ID: <19970815105107.41593@strand.iii.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199708150604.AAA17883@obie.softweyr.ml.org>; from Wes Peters on Fri, Aug 15, 1997 at 12:04:41AM -0600 References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970813184359.1207A-100000@acp.qiv.com> <Pine.BSF.3.95.970813193414.2918A-100000@luke.cpl.net> <v03102809b017e0cc04e6@[205.232.46.109]> <199708150604.AAA17883@obie.softweyr.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 15, 1997 at 12:04:41AM -0600, Wes Peters wrote:
> Ken McKittrick writes:
> > How reliable is a file system if it's mounted asynch really????
>
> Just as reliable as they are on Linux, where it is the default:
>
> NOT VERY!
Not true. The reliability of the filesystem is the same.
The possibility of filesystem corruption should the power suddenly go out
increases though.
Mounting your drives async is not going to suddenly cause random bit
corruption in your files.
N
--
--+==[ Nik Clayton is Just Another Perl Hacker at Interactive Investor ]==+--
"The good guys dress in black. Remember that." NC5-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970815105107.41593>