Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 21:01:38 +0200 From: Ulrich Spoerlein <uspoerlein@gmail.com> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org, Craig Boston <craig@xfoil.gank.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: GJournal (hopefully) final patches. Message-ID: <20060817190138.GB1091@roadrunner.aventurien.local> In-Reply-To: <20060810192841.GA1345@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20060808195202.GA1564@garage.freebsd.pl> <20060810184702.GA8567@nowhere> <20060810192841.GA1345@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 01:47:23PM -0500, Craig Boston wrote: > I prefer to put gjournal on the top, because it gives consistency to > layers below it. For example I can use geli with bigger sector size > (sector size greater than disk sector size in encryption-only-mode can > be unreliable on power failures, which is not the case when gjournal is > above geli), I can turn off synchronization of gmirror/graid3 after a > power failure, etc. I have been bitten by the bigger sector size + kernel crash, and it is not funny. Could you *please* add a note to the geli and/or gjournal manpages describing the various possibilities and their advantages/drawbacks? Thanks. Ulrich Spoerlein -- A: Yes. >Q: Are you sure? > >A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. > >>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060817190138.GB1091>