Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 20:46:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com> Cc: roberto@keltia.freenix.fr, current@FreeBSD.ORG, mckusick@mckusick.com Subject: Re: Soft Updates Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.980509204058.5804A-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <9805100336.AA06453@watermarkgroup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
well that's PART of it, there was also that a Filesystem needs to be in softupdates mode always or never, and a lot of flags in mount can be changed on the fly. (e.g. async, noatime) theoretically corect code in the kernel could use mount flags and do the same trick that changing from readwrite to readonly does (maybe turning softupdates onand off would rewuire moving through read-only) but possibly the answer is to simply 'latch' the bit the way you want and not let it change unless it's an initial mount or unmount. julian On Sat, 9 May 1998, Luoqi Chen wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > Kirk had some very good arguments but I forget what they were.. > > > Maybe fsck needs some special processing for softupdates after a crash? > > > > > On Sun, 10 May 1998, Ollivier Robert wrote: > > > > > According to Julian Elischer: > > > > you need to use the -n option of tunefs on an unmounted filesystem > > > > it's not a mount option.. > > > > > > Why not BTW ? async/noasync are mount options so one could expect > > > softupdates to be the same. Is there an reason for the current scheme (not > > > that I mind but it would make switch it on/off easier, especially for /). > > > -- > > > Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr > > > FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 3.0-CURRENT #8: Tue Apr 21 02:45:53 CEST 1998 > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.980509204058.5804A-100000>