Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 09:46:46 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> Cc: Mark Powell <mark@plato.ucsalf.ac.uk>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux async vs. FreeBSD sync Message-ID: <199608081546.JAA17418@rover.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 08 Aug 1996 18:30:47 %2B0900
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
: The FFS careful synchronous does have performance penalties, but I think : we agree that the data integrity it provides is more important. : : FFS also takes pains to write to the disk intelligently leading to better : recoverability and less fragmentation. In the last two and half years of using FreeBSD, I've only had one file system corruption not caused by a flakey disk. That was when I shut off the power (by mistake) on my FreeBSD box while doing an import of linux sources into a CVS tree I keep here for linux hacking. I lost 28 CVS files and had to get them off of tape... :-(. fsck was happy with the disk, and reported nothing unusual about it on the reboot, which was really odd (yes, it did a full fsck, not just a simple "its clean" check). Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608081546.JAA17418>