Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 18 Feb 2000 15:08:20 -0800 (PST)
From:      Tom <tom@uniserve.com>
To:        "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>
Cc:        Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Initial performance testing w/ postmark & softupdates...
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.10002181507120.1712-100000@shell.uniserve.ca>
In-Reply-To: <38ACAF8B.65E314E9@newsguy.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 18 Feb 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:

> Tom wrote:
> > 
> >   Not really.  You could just use async updates instead of softupdates.
> > Or an OS that uses async updates.  Write caching metadata is always faster
> > than re-ordering it intelligently.
> 
> Softupdates reduces the number of writes needed. It can coalesce writes
> to the same block.

  Async updates are always as fast as softupdates, if not faster.  You
should read the softupdates docs.

> --
> Daniel C. Sobral			(8-DCS)
> dcs@newsguy.com
> dcs@freebsd.org
> 
> 	"If you consider our help impolite, you should see the manager."


Tom
Uniserve



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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.10002181507120.1712-100000>