Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 02:45:52 +0200 From: Marko Zec <zec@tel.fer.hr> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PATCH: Forcible delaying of UFS (soft)updates Message-ID: <200304180245.53107.zec@tel.fer.hr> In-Reply-To: <3E9F4413.D294E69E@mindspring.com> References: <200304162310.aa96829@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> <200304172143.26387.zec@tel.fer.hr> <3E9F4413.D294E69E@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 18 April 2003 02:17, Terry Lambert wrote: > I think people would be happier if you just stopped the soft > updates sync clock, and then if someone actually fsync()'ed, or > the dependency list got too big, it spun up the disk, completed > all the I/O quickly, and then spun it down again. The updated patch does precisely what you just described above. It already includes a tunable vfs.ena_lazy_fsync (off by default) which allows choosing whether blocking (standard) or null- fsync() semantics apply. Check out http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=15720+0+current/freebsd-fs :) Marko
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200304180245.53107.zec>