On Thu, 03 Feb 2000 09:05:35 -0500 , "Len Budney" writes:
> Agreed; that's a serious issue. I would recommend switching to a better
> synchronous filesystem, though, rather than using ext2 async.
>
> Unfortunately, Linux offers few choices there. The BSD fs would be great
> if it wasn't so immature under Linux;
However, it's quite mature under *BSD ;-)
Using softupdates under *BSD gives you the reliability
of sync (somewhat more, actually), with nearly the speed
of async.
--
Chris Mikkelson | "I have yet to see any problem, however complicated,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | which, when you looked at it the right way, did not
| become still more complicated." -- Poul Anderson
- Logging information about each email. Qmail
- Re: Logging information about each email. Magnus Bodin
- Re: Logging information about each email. petervd
- Linux kernel turning for mail performance? Jeremy Hansen
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail performance... petervd
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail perform... Jeremy Hansen
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail performance... Len Budney
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail perform... Derek Callaway
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail perform... petervd
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail pe... Len Budney
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mai... cmikk
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mai... nascheme
- Re: Linux kernel turning for... cmikk
- Re: Linux kernel turning for... nascheme
- Re: Linux kernel turning for... Andre Oppermann
- Re: Linux kernel turning for... nascheme
- Re: Linux kernel turning for... cmikk
- Re: Linux kernel turning for... Russell Nelson
- OT: fsync semantics (was Re:... cmikk
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was... Russell Nelson
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was... cmikk
