Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:33:41 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: "Sergey N. Voronkov" <serg@tmn.ru> Cc: asym <bsdlists@rfnj.org>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dangerous situation with shutdown process Message-ID: <42D74AB5.4000907@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <20050715051542.GA80213@tmn.ru> References: <42D6B117.5080302@plab.ku.dk> <20050714191449.A8A615D07@ptavv.es.net> <20050714191942.GA98637@freebie.xs4all.nl> <6.2.1.2.2.20050714161537.0378c310@mail.rfnj.org> <20050715051542.GA80213@tmn.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ ...crossposting trimmed... ] Sergey N. Voronkov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 04:17:06PM -0400, asym wrote: [ ... ] >> The funny thing about all the replies here.. is that this guy is not saying >> that sync doesn't work. >> >> He's saying that the timeout built into shutdown causes it to *terminate* >> the sync forcibly before it's done, and then reboot. Good observations. >> All finger pointing about IDE, SCSI, softupdates, and journals aside.. I >> think all he wants/needs is a way to increase that timer. Sort of. If you queue up a huge I/O operation which takes several minutes to complete, and then also insist upon shutting the machine down before the operation completes, well, one of them is going to have to preempt the other. Extending the shutdown indefinitely is not a reasonable option if the two-minute shutdown warning is coming from a UPS which is about to run out of battery, and the end result of killing a process that won't politely die when SIGTERM'ed to end up with clean filesystems is a better choice. > If you can't increase shutdown timeout, decrease softupdates timers. > > # tail -3 /etc/sysctl.conf > kern.metadelay=14 > kern.dirdelay=15 > kern.filedelay=17 > > That was my solution for shutdown wait timeout. This may help, too, but it may not always be enough. -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42D74AB5.4000907>