On 08/01/2018 06:20 AM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * John Snow (js...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I'd rather do something like this:
>> - Always flush bitmaps to disk on inactivate.
>
> Does that increase the time taken by the inactivate measurably?
> If it's small relative to everything else that's fine; it's just I
> always worry a little since I think this happens after we've stopped the
> CPU on the source, so is part of the 'downtime'.
>
> Dave
> --
> Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
>
I'm worried that if we don't, we're leaving behind unusable, partially
complete files behind us. That's a bad design and we shouldn't push for
it just because it's theoretically faster.
--js
