Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 31 Jan 2002 00:53:40 -0500
From:      "C J Michaels" <cjm2@earthling.net>
To:        "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1012866347.c6a6f0@mired.org>
Cc:        <questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: Softupdates ( why not to use on / fs )
Message-ID:  <OGEFLCDDBCNNBEFGIFEFOEKHCAAA.cjm2@earthling.net>
In-Reply-To: <15448.34219.325331.975819@guru.mired.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Meyer bestowed this upon us:

<...snip...>
> I think the real reason that softupdates is disabled on root is that
> there has been a history of kernel installs failing in that
> configuration. Softupdates can cause the space occupied by a deleted
> file to not become available for as much as 30 seconds after the
> delete happens. If you are tight on space on root, this can make
> removing the kernel and a bunch of kld's and then copying new ones
> into place fail.

Wouldn't a sync(8) between the delete(s) and the write(s) solve this
problem?  or is it just way past my bed time again?  :)

>
> 	<mike
> --
> Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more
information.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?OGEFLCDDBCNNBEFGIFEFOEKHCAAA.cjm2>