Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 02:07:31 -0800 (PST) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: jeff-ml@mountin.net (Jeffrey J. Mountin) Cc: tom@uniserve.com (Tom), stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Initial performance testing w/ postmark & softupdates... Message-ID: <200002191007.CAA52625@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.20000219035342.009ce460@207.227.119.2> from "Jeffrey J. Mountin" at "Feb 19, 2000 03:53:42 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> At 03:08 PM 2/18/00 -0800, Tom wrote: > >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. > > As fast, but not safer. > > Can't recall the entire analogy, but Terry mentioned on -hacker a long time > back something to the effect that softupdates is like having a seatbelt and > an airbag rather than just a seatbelt, as well as a faster car too. Or my own version of this... Async is skydiving with a main, softupdates adds a reserve just in case :-) -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net 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?200002191007.CAA52625>