Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:27:28 -0700 From: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@freebsd.org> To: mike@adept.org Cc: mike@sentex.net, sucho2@quasar.phys.vt.edu, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Regarding hw.ata.wc="1"...... Message-ID: <20010724092728E.jkh@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107240809090.92392-100000@snafu.adept.org> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010724103842.064dde20@marble.sentex.ca> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107240809090.92392-100000@snafu.adept.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Don't resurrect this thread - it already ran long enough the first time and had plenty of argument advanced on both sides. Go read the mailing list archives if you feel a deepseated personal need to go through the decision process in agonizing detail because that's what we did already. - Jordan From: Mike Hoskins <mike@adept.org> Subject: Re: Regarding hw.ata.wc="1"...... Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 08:12:58 -0700 (PDT) > On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > to take. Yes, writes will be faster with write caching enabled. However, > > its that much more risky incase of power loss. > <snip> > > disabled by default. However, it was turned back on as a default a little > > later. > > Hmm. I hope the response to recent performance tests was /not/ to make a > potentially unsafe option 'default'. > > Sometimes 'faster' isn't better - anyone with a brain knows that, > right? Try replacing an overloaded VAX with a nice x86 box and watch it > run fast at first, then die smoking under load (humorous story from > college days ;)... You get my point. > > Later, > -Mike > > -- > Log analysis mailing list: > http://www.adept.org/mailinglists.html#logwatchers > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010724092728E.jkh>