Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 11:03:02 -0400 From: Bill Vermillion <bv@wjv.com> To: David Magda <dmagda@ee.ryerson.ca> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dangerous situation with shutdown process Message-ID: <20050716150302.GA7695@wjv.com> In-Reply-To: <ce7d0cc89022dbb4f4815a43cb64172a@ee.ryerson.ca> References: <20050714223127.34EDB16A422@hub.freebsd.org> <20050715150829.GC76303@wjv.com> <ce7d0cc89022dbb4f4815a43cb64172a@ee.ryerson.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I know you'll find this hard to believe, but on Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 10:52 ,
David Magda actually admitted to saying:
>
> On Jul 15, 2005, at 11:08, Bill Vermillion wrote:
> >If you only do huge copies and immediate shutdowns rarely, then
> >maybe it's just a good idea to remember how softupdates work, and
> >then fsck, then shutdown.
> This may sound simplistic, but what about a triple sync(8)? ("sync;
> sync; sync")
Actually I saw that documented a very very long time ago in
an Intel Unix manual. And Intel got out of Unix in the mid to late
1980s. I don't recall if that was the one that was sold to Kodak -
the picture people - which then was sold to Interactive ?? - and
eventually wound up at Sun. There were so many Unix variants
in those days you had to have a chart to keep up with them. Each
HW manufacturer had their own version and name, and at that time
the only time you could call your OS Unix was if you compiled
it directly from the AT&T tapes with no changes on a Vax [if I
recall the scenario correctly].
But that was a long time ago.
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050716150302.GA7695>