Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 01:32:25 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Panic in FFS/4.0 as of yesterday Message-ID: <199902220932.BAA29386@apollo.backplane.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9902220915100.82049-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I don't think B_EXPIDITE could ever be made to work well. Why not limit
the number of async I/O write operations allowed to be in-progress at any
given moment for ops run by the syncer, swapper, or flushdirtybufs?.
Either on a vnode-by-vnode or a mount-by-mount basis? I do a poor-man's
version of this for the swapper. At least then the hacks would be
concentrated together rather then strewn all over the codebase. The
write queueing problem seems to be quite general in nature, which means
that the solution should not be to have to hack each and every device
that might do I/O ( aka UFS in this case ).
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199902220932.BAA29386>