Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 14:32:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Eno Thereska <eno@andrew.cmu.edu> To: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: flush on close Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55L-032.0309111428050.22691@unix46.andrew.cmu.edu> In-Reply-To: <20030911110203.I61751@carver.gumbysoft.com> References: <3F5FCEB5.9010407@andrew.cmu.edu> <20030911110203.I61751@carver.gumbysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doung, Thanks for the quick reply. I am using the default options (noasync, which according to the man pages means that metadata I/O should be done synchronously, while data I/O is asynchronous). Unfortunately, with any of these options (nosync, async or using soft updates), I think the flush-on-close semantics is an orthogonal issue. For example, with the async option, with the flush-on-close semantics, data and metadata are flushed. Please let me know if you have any more hints on this. Thanks Eno On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Doug White wrote: > Remove -fs. Don't crosspost, please. > > On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Eno Thereska wrote: > > > In FreeBSD 4.4, I am noticing a huge number of calls > > to ffs_fsync() (in /sys/ufs/ffs/ffs_vnops.c) > > when running a benchmark like Postmark. > > Were you using softupdates, or the sync or async mount options? > > I believe this is correct (and safe) behavior for the default case. > > -- > Doug White | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve > dwhite@gumbysoft.com | www.FreeBSD.org > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.55L-032.0309111428050.22691>