Date: 12 Apr 2003 04:07:40 -0400 From: "Brandon S. Allbery " KF8NH <allbery@ece.cmu.edu> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PATCH: Forcible delaying of UFS (soft)updates Message-ID: <1050134860.7300.0.camel@rushlight.kf8nh.apk.net> In-Reply-To: <20030412033307.GR30960@elvis.mu.org> References: <3E976EBD.C3E66EF8@tel.fer.hr> <20030412033307.GR30960@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 23:33, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Marko Zec <zec@tel.fer.hr> [030411 19:01] wrote: > > - fsync() no longer flushes the buffers to disk, but returns immediately > > instead; > > This is really the only bad thing I can see here, what about introducing > a slight delay and seeing if one can coalesce the writes? Is this > part really needed? Making fsync() not work is a good way to make > any sort of userland based transactional system break badly. If you're running that kind of thing you really don't want to be using extended delays anyway, I'd think. -- brandon s allbery [openafs/solaris/japh/freebsd] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net system administrator [linux/heimdal/too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering KF8NH carnegie mellon university [better check the oblivious first -ke6sls]
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1050134860.7300.0.camel>