From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Mar 10 13:11:32 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA24553
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 13:11:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA24547
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 13:11:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA23487; Mon, 10 Mar 1997 14:03:40 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199703102103.OAA23487@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: Hard Link Count too small!
To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans)
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1997 14:03:40 -0700 (MST)
Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG,
        jez@netcraft.co.uk
In-Reply-To: <199703080434.PAA09045@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Mar 8, 97 03:34:38 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> >> I have some POSIX performance tests that do this several times.  They
> >> take too long.  They take much too long if the filesystem is not async
> >> mounted.
> >
> >They must not be very POSIX dependent, or they would fail from the
> >"shall mark for update"/"shall update" discrepancies introduced by
> >the async mount.  An async mounted FS is not POSIX compliant.  An
> 
> Wrong.

"SHALL BE UPDATED".

Not "SHALL BE WRITTEN TO CACHE AND MAYBE UPDATED SOMETIME".


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.