Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 15:16:37 -0500 From: Steve Byan <stephen_byan@maxtor.com> To: phk@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, tech-kern@netbsd.org Subject: Re: DEV_B_SIZE Message-ID: <E6AEE678-3558-11D7-B26B-00306548867E@maxtor.com> In-Reply-To: <22438.1044040127@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 02:08 PM, phk@freebsd.org wrote: > I get the sense that you want us to say "NOOOO this is HORRIBLE!!!" > and you won't stop asking until we do ? > > You won't have that from this bloke at least. > > I don't know what the agenda you push are, but I'm not pushing it > for you... I keep getting a response that reads like "we'll detect the larger block size and run with it". I'm concerned that I'm not being clear that IDEMA is thinking of proposing a backward-compatibility mode with the presumption that it will work fine (albeit slowly) with existing binaries, i.e. code that hasn't been modified to be aware of the larger block size. If you think there are no functional problems with this backwards-compatibility scenario, including during recovery (fsck or journal roll-forward), I'd be happy to hear a clear "no problem". Regards, -Steve -------- Steve Byan <stephen_byan@maxtor.com> Design Engineer Maxtor Corp. MS 1-3/E23 333 South Street Shrewsbury, MA 01545 (508) 770-3414 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E6AEE678-3558-11D7-B26B-00306548867E>