From owner-freebsd-current Thu May 14 02:50:25 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA21365 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Thu, 14 May 1998 02:50:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA21337 for ; Thu, 14 May 1998 02:50:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA03852; Thu, 14 May 1998 02:49:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) To: Mikhail Teterin cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: soft updates and async In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 14 May 1998 00:30:42 EDT." <199805140430.AAA05562@rtfm.ziplink.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 02:49:40 -0700 Message-ID: <3848.895139380@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > My understanding was: softupdates are faster then sync and safer > then sync. Is not async still faster, even at the expense of safety? No. My understanding is that the two features represent totally different metadata update policies and are, as such, mutually exclusive. There would never be any reason to combine them, nor would it make any sense. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message