From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Sep 24 12:55:45 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id MAA22316 for fs-outgoing; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 12:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roguetrader.com (brandon@cold.org [206.81.134.103]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA22304 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 12:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (brandon@localhost) by roguetrader.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA06513; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 13:56:11 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 13:56:11 -0600 (MDT) From: Brandon Gillespie To: Wilko Bulte cc: tlambert@primenet.com, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Known problems with async ufs? In-Reply-To: <199709241734.TAA00972@yedi.iaf.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 24 Sep 1997, Wilko Bulte wrote: > As Brandon Gillespie wrote... > > On Wed, 24 Sep 1997, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > That answer the question? > > > > Very much so, thanks! > > > > Basically, with all of the down-play towards using an async FS it seemed > > as if there may be bugs within the actual async code, and not just the > > crash/power-fail situation problems. > > > > I personally am running off a smart-ups, and have a daemon monitoring it > > so it will shutdown properly, if need be. > > UPS don't buy you much if the machine crashes/panics on it's own. Lets > say due to a memory parity error, or hard I/O error in swap or something. > > My point is: it's not only power fails that can hurt you. hrm, true Ok... what (if any) plans are there to make async at least as ''stable'' as ext2fs? I'm under the impression that ext2fs does something so it can recover from "bad things" better.. -Brandon