On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 12:34:22AM +0100, Fredrik Widlund wrote.. > Yes, it forces writeback even when the controller has no BBU. Choosing > WBack itself will default back to WThru. It's dangerous, but I guess it > should be much less dangerous than using for example softupdates. We > have little choice until our order of BBUs get here, since the > performance degradation of wthru would make it unusable for us.
At least hook the machine up to an UPS if you have one. > Ivan Voras skrev: > >Fredrik Widlund wrote: > > > >>Solved my issue with LSI 8480E without BBU. With "write: BadBBU", > >>"cache: enabled", and "io: cached", performance rose to around 200MB/s > >>from 20MB/s. > >> > > > >I don't know what "BadBBU" is, but from some Googling it seems to be a > >setting that overrides BBU detection, and enables write caching even if > >the system believes BBU is broken or missing. If true, this may be > >dangerous for data consistency. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >[email protected] mailing list > >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" --- end of quoted text --- -- Wilko Bulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
