From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 27 01:42:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: doc@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F77016A4DD; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 01:42:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danger@FreeBSD.org) Received: from virtual.micronet.sk (smtp.micronet.sk [84.16.32.237]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEDE143D46; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 01:42:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from danger@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by virtual.micronet.sk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923C910E6FD; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 03:42:14 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at virtual.micronet.sk Received: from virtual.micronet.sk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (virtual.micronet.sk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zBfKMS-R5aSN; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 03:42:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from danger.mcrn.sk (danger.mcrn.sk [84.16.37.254]) by virtual.micronet.sk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080EA10E6A4; Sun, 27 Aug 2006 03:42:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 03:42:25 +0200 From: Daniel Gerzo Organization: The FreeBSD Project X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <2510186921.20060827034225@rulez.sk> To: doc@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Tom Rhodes , Giorgos Keramidas Subject: mount(8) async description X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Gerzo List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 01:42:27 -0000 Hello doc, Milos Vyletel [mv(a)rulez.sk] noticed me about the current description of the async flag for the mount -- we currently have: async All I/O to the file system should be done asynchronously. ` This is a dangerous flag to set, and should not be used unless you are prepared to recreate the file system should your system crash. Firstly, we thought that the last line is wrong, that s/should/after/ would work, but I was told that the current version is proper English. But I still agree with Milos and I don't like the current description, therefore I produced a patch which says: async All I/O to the file system should be done asynchronously. This is a dangerous flag to set, although it increases I/O performance. When this option is used, it is not guaranteed to keep a consistent file system structure on the disk, and it is impossible to verify the integrity of data. It should be used only if some application-spe- cific data recovery mechanism is present, or recreation of the file system is not a problem. I passed this through my mentors, it was OK'd by Tom, but Giorgos says it's too wordy and he likes NetBSD's description: async All I/O to the file system should be done asyn- chronously. In the event of a crash, it is impossible for the system to verify the integrity of data on a file system mounted with this option. You should only use this option if you have an applica- tion-specific data recovery mechanism, or are willing to recreate the file system from scratch. To be complete, OpenBSD has: async All I/O to the file system should be done asynchronously. This is a dangerous flag to set since it does not guaran- tee to keep a consistent file system structure on the disk. You should not use this flag unless you are pre- pared to recreate the file system should your system crash. The most common use of this flag is to speed up restore(8) where it can give a factor of two speed in- crease. Giorgos told me to go through doc@ and ask what other people think. So here it is. What do you think about my description? Would you accept it, or should I trim it a bit? Or just pick the NetBSD's one and commit? -- Best regards, Daniel mailto:danger@FreeBSD.org