On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 12:25:59PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2001, Shannon wrote:
> > On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 10:54:40PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> > > 1. I don't think I've ever seen a Linux distro which has write
> > > caching enabled by default. Hell, DMA33 isn't even enabled
> > > by default ;)
> >
> > You are talking about controlling the IDE drive cache.
> >
> > The issue here is write cache in the filesystem code.
>
> 1) IIRC they were talking about hw.ata.wc
In a subthread, yeah. I think though, the overall issue is the caching
ext2 does that ufs does not. I'm not even sure that soft updates is
quite the same thing. I think the soft-updates paper mentions that it
shouldn't increase risk, while a lot of people feel like ext2 is very
risky.
I never really notice a big difference when I turn on write caching
with my system (on the hard drive). It's been awhile since I did any
benchmarks though, since I no longer run IDE drives on most systems. You
can control the cache on them too with the right scsi tools, but I've
not really messed with it.
--
"There is no such thing as security. Life is either bold | | |
adventure, or it is nothing -- Helen Keller" | | |
________________________________________________________________ / | \
s h a n n o n @ w i d o m a k e r . c o m _/ | \_
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
