Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 18:09:10 +1000 From: Greg Black <gjb@gbch.net> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: soft updates and qmail (RE: qmail IO problems) Message-ID: <nospam-3a8102a6ad0a69e@maxim.gbch.net> In-Reply-To: <200102061759.f16Hxv662437@earth.backplane.com> of Tue, 06 Feb 2001 09:59:57 PST References: <Pine.BSF.4.31.0102061149180.14899-100000@achilles.silby.com> <200102061759.f16Hxv662437@earth.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dillon wrote: > And, I would say, that for any mailer creating and deleting files in > a spool directory at a high rate, *ONLY* a filesystem with softupdates > turned on or a journaling filesystem such as XFS or ReiserFS can be > considered crash-surviveable. Synchronous meta-data updates will not > save you (EXT2FS or FFS without softupdates). It seems to me that you're saying that softupdates is now the recommended way to go -- so why does 4.2-Release still have the dire warnings in /sys/ufs/ffs/README.softupdates? Is that file obsolete, or do the warnings still apply? Greg 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?nospam-3a8102a6ad0a69e>