Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:21:21 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> Cc: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Where is the syncer kernel process implemented? Message-ID: <20000725092121.K13979@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <1356.964511937@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>; from sheldonh@uunet.co.za on Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 09:58:57AM %2B0200 References: <200007250534.WAA12006@beastie.mckusick.com> <1356.964511937@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> [000725 00:59] wrote: > > > On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:34:39 MST, Kirk McKusick wrote: > > > time_t filedelay = 30; /* time to delay syncing files */ > > time_t dirdelay = 29; /* time to delay syncing directories */ > > time_t metadelay = 28; /* time to delay syncing metadata */ > > > > Each of these variables is individually setable. > > These are maximum offsets from the current queue offset (syncer_delayno) > at which new vnode entries may be inserted. That means they can > be changed arbitrarily without fear of "orphaned" slots, right? If you mean "they can be changed without fear of loosing vnodes" then the answer is "yes", the problem is that if you bump any of these guys past 30 without fixing the #define SYNCER_MAXDELAY above them they'll still be truncated to SYNCER_MAXDELAY because vn_syncer_add_to_worklist() clips it like so: if (delay > syncer_maxdelay - 2) delay = syncer_maxdelay - 2; (clip to SYNCER_MAXDELAY-2) -Alfred 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?20000725092121.K13979>