Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 21:50:17 -0400 From: Bill Moran <wmoran@iowna.com> To: Jonathan Chen <jonathan.chen@itouch.co.nz> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Remount Filesystems Message-ID: <3B0DBA59.14E1D208@iowna.com> References: <SAK.2001.05.24.raeessor@support10> <20010525094056.B37339@itouchnz.itouch> <3B0D8A80.596CC3B7@iowna.com> <20010525103021.B40969@itouchnz.itouch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jonathan Chen wrote: > > On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 06:26:09PM -0400, Bill Moran wrote: > > [...] > > I don't understand why you'd bother with softupdates on / anyway? Just > > from my perspective, I try to keep the / fs as reliable as possible and, > > although softupdates is very reliable, it does have a slightly higher > > incidence of crash corruption than standard sync. > > Really? My understanding of softupdates was that it keeps that metadata > in a more stable state, and thus makes your filesystem *less* prone to > fsck problems. > > Otherwise, why would anyone want to enable softupdates on a production > system? No, softupdates is a compromise between the speed of async and the reliability of sync. Unfortunately I'm not terribly familiar with the technical details, but in order of reliability it's sync->softupdates->async while speed is async->softupdates->sync. Keep in mind that all are reliable under normal conditions, it's only abnormal conditions (like power failure) that cause problems. /usr/src/contrib/sys/softupdates/README may have more details for you, but I accidentally blew away my source tree the other day, so I'm not 100% sure what's in that file, and I can't remember exactly where I learned this from initially, or I'd point you there. -Bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B0DBA59.14E1D208>