Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 15:24:13 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> To: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@monzoon.net> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>, Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Charles Randall <crandall@matchlogic.com>, Dan Phoenix <dphoenix@bravenet.com>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Jos Backus <josb@cncdsl.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: soft updates and qmail (RE: qmail IO problems) Message-ID: <200102092324.f19NODX15558@earth.backplane.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102061555550.1535-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> <3A805035.C71AAD5E@monzoon.net> <200102061943.f16Jhp365113@earth.backplane.com> <3A805938.96ED890D@monzoon.net> <200102062018.f16KIdx66146@earth.backplane.com> <200102090602.f1962cM19819@earth.backplane.com> <3A84659C.F841F58E@monzoon.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:I do. Is it safe there as well (from your point of view)?
:
:--
:Andre
Yes. In general softupdates will make the entire filesystem safer.
The commit sequencing doesn't match what qmail expects, but there
are so many fsyncs going on that the absolute worse that can happen
in a crash is a just-deleted queue file showing up in the queue
directory after crash recovery. And, really, qmail shouldn't be
making assumptions about system calls committing operations to disk
synchronously. Very few modern filesystems actually do that... FFS
(without softupdates) is one of the last ones.
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102092324.f19NODX15558>