Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 01:39:52 -0600 From: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1012894792.d4081f@mired.org> To: "C J Michaels" <cjm2@earthling.net> Cc: <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Softupdates ( why not to use on / fs ) Message-ID: <15448.62664.514402.924224@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <OGEFLCDDBCNNBEFGIFEFOEKHCAAA.cjm2@earthling.net> References: <15448.34219.325331.975819@guru.mired.org> <OGEFLCDDBCNNBEFGIFEFOEKHCAAA.cjm2@earthling.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
C J Michaels <cjm2@earthling.net> types: > Mike Meyer bestowed this upon us: > <...snip...> > > I think the real reason that softupdates is disabled on root is that > > there has been a history of kernel installs failing in that > > configuration. Softupdates can cause the space occupied by a deleted > > file to not become available for as much as 30 seconds after the > > delete happens. If you are tight on space on root, this can make > > removing the kernel and a bunch of kld's and then copying new ones > > into place fail. > Wouldn't a sync(8) between the delete(s) and the write(s) solve this > problem? or is it just way past my bed time again? :) One would think so, but it doesn't seem to work. Even the old "sync three times" trick didn't work. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15448.62664.514402.924224>