Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 21:11:50 +0200 From: Marko Zec <zec@tel.fer.hr> To: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PATCH: Forcible delaying of UFS (soft)updates Message-ID: <3E9C5975.43755858@tel.fer.hr> References: <3E976EBD.C3E66EF8@tel.fer.hr> <20030414101935.GB18110@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Schultz wrote: > For instance, you could > have fsync() push the appropriate dirty buffers out to a separate > cache, then commit the contents of the cache in the order of the > fsyncs when the disk is next active. Huh... such a concept would still break fsync() semantics. Note that the original patch also ensures dirty buffers get flushed if / when the disk spins up, even before the delay timer gets expired. > - The fiddling with rushjob seems rather arbitrary. You can probably > just let the existing code increment it as necessary and force a sync > if the value gets too high. If rushjob is would not be used for forcing prompt synching, the original code could not guarantee the sync to occur immediately. Instead, the synching could be further delayed for up to 30 seconds, which is not desirable if our major design goal is to do as much disk I/O as possible in a small time interval and leave the disk idle otherwise. Marko
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E9C5975.43755858>