On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Marco Peereboom <[email protected]> wrote: > I gave you the answer several times but I'll humor you and do it one > more time.
No, you didn't, see below. This thread started here: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126435421227560&w=2 After I replied to that message (specifically asking and noting that the conditions are that write-back cache is disabled on both the controller and disk(s)), you tried to spin it by saying that write-back cache is enabled everywhere anyway and implying that rename(2) crash guarantee doesn't apply. Do I understand this correctly, or you meant something else, perhaps referring to the previous thread about DJB claimed qmail's crash-proof queue?: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126438080626509&w=2 Then you said "that no one disables WB cache", and that no RAID controllers are to be trusted, I assume for the same question about rename(2), or maybe you are talking about somethig else here again?: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126438645130701&w=2 Then I asked http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126439429105565&w=2 "Now the simplest case: a SATA controller as found on any recent motherboard, or a SATA add-on card, and a disk with write-back cache turned off. What are the problems there?" AND YOU DIDN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. Instead you are throwing an insult. Usually people do this when they have nothing to answer: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126445421228585&w=2 Your opinion about RAID controllers that do not disable drives' write-back cache (and some do disable it) does not directly apply to my question about a SATA controller with a drive with disabled write-back cache, which you are refusing to answer. Paul de Weerd did though, and I am grateful, but I'd rather see your explanation :) http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=126446163007758&w=2
