From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Sep 24 00:07:31 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id AAA09509 for fs-outgoing; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 00:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from palrel1.hp.com (palrel1.hp.com [156.153.255.235]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA09494 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 00:07:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from postbox.india.hp.com (postbox.india.hp.com [15.10.45.1]) by palrel1.hp.com (8.8.6/8.8.5tis) with ESMTP id AAA12771; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 00:07:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199709240707.AAA12771@palrel1.hp.com> Received: from localhost by postbox.india.hp.com with ESMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA038034586; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 12:33:06 +0530 To: Terry Lambert Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Known problems with async ufs? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 24 Sep 1997 05:26:32 GMT." <199709240526.WAA02832@usr07.primenet.com> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 12:33:06 +0530 From: A Joseph Koshy Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >>>> "Terry Lambert" writes > Other ways of making the same ordering guarantees are delayed ordered I read (over a year back) that soft updates were being worked on by Keith Bostic(?). Anyone have any idea of further progress on this? > which doesn't have a serial port), then it's much safer to run async; > of course, you are still screwed if your power supply fails, and you > aren't in the Soft Updates or NVRAM cases. This doesn't offer protection from OS crashes though, so you are still exposed to some degree of risk. Koshy My Personal Opinions Only.