Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:27:24 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern vfs_subr.c Message-ID: <20041204230638.W10805@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20041204075743.GL69608@elvis.mu.org> References: <20041203120940.5573116A515@hub.freebsd.org> <41B091E8.2060807@root.org><20041204075743.GL69608@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> [041203 23:42] wrote: > > On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Nate Lawson wrote: > > > > > I think that breaking vprint() into multiple lines is not a good idea. > > > Bruce pointed this out to me when I was doing the v_tag changes a while ago. > > > > What's the reason? > > possibility of it being non-atomically written to the log files? The original reason was that log files work best with 1 line per event. vprint() prints a label, but only for the first line so breaking the lines breaks grepping for the label... Atomicity isn't guaranteed, but Ian Dowse made it more likely that single-line messages are complete if they are logged to disk at all, by discarding truncated lines. This doesn't work so well for incomplete multi-line messages. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041204230638.W10805>