Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 15:32:17 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Does UFS2 send BIO_FLUSH to GEOM when update metadata (with softupdates)? Message-ID: <1356091030.20111127153217@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <201111261712.pAQHCY8G081783@chez.mckusick.com> References: <147455115.20111126115248@serebryakov.spb.ru> <201111261712.pAQHCY8G081783@chez.mckusick.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Kirk. You wrote 26 =ED=EE=FF=E1=F0=FF 2011 =E3., 21:12:34: > and other issues raised, this is clearly a bad idea. So, my question > to you is how can we reliably get the underlying systems to not lie > to us about the stability of our I/O request? BTW, strict FSYNC flag will be very useful for transactional databases. It is not too good, that now GEOM doesn't know about such writes and could dealy them and could not mark them for underlying hardware. --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1356091030.20111127153217>