On 2016-04-04 14.58.33 +0700, Tinker wrote:
> Is "softdep" dangerous? :-O
This thread explains more:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=142164001816142=2
On 2016-04-02 17:22, Karel Gardas wrote:
..
so basically the situation is like with the current softdep which is
also dangerous in slow-write-drive low-memory situation and yet it's
in tree.
Is "softdep" dangerous? :-O
I thought it was a benevolent filesystem optimization, is it malevolent
> I have more up to date versions of these patches around here.
>
> The problem with them is that fundamentally, the WAPBL implementation
> as it is assumes that it may infinitely steal
> buffers from the buffer cache and hold onto them indefinitely - and it
> assumes it can
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Bob Beck <b...@obtuse.com> wrote:
> I have more up to date versions of these patches around here.
>
> The problem with them is that fundamentally, the WAPBL implementation
> as it is assumes that it may infinitely steal
> buffers from the buffe
1, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Bob Beck <b...@obtuse.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have more up to date versions of these patches around here.
> >>
> >> The problem with them is that fundamentally, the WAPBL implementation
> >> as it is assumes that it may infinitel
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Bob Beck <b...@obtuse.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have more up to date versions of these patches around here.
>>
>> The problem with them is that fundamentally, the WAPBL implementation
>> as it
could the bug(s) be? in amap, uvm/buffer cache, rthreads???
Thanks in advance
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Bob Beck <b...@obtuse.com> wrote:
> I have more up to date versions of these patches around here.
>
> The problem with them is that fundamentally, the WAPBL implementation
>
I have more up to date versions of these patches around here.
The problem with them is that fundamentally, the WAPBL implementation
as it is assumes that it may infinitely steal
buffers from the buffer cache and hold onto them indefinitely - and it
assumes it can always get buffers from it. While
Hi Predrag,
2016-03-28 22:42 GMT-03:00 Predrag Punosevac <punoseva...@gmail.com>:
> Walter Neto wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm not working on it for a while. Sadly I am with no time, but trying
>> to escape to return. :(
>>
>
> This is most r
Hi,
> I'm not working on it for a while. Sadly I am with no time, but trying
> to escape to return. :(
Thanks for the update.
Kind regards,
Martijn Rijkeboer
Walter Neto wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm not working on it for a while. Sadly I am with no time, but trying
> to escape to return. :(
>
This is most regrettable. I was following your work on porting WAPBL and
the correspondence on tech@openbsd with great interest. Do you thin
Hi,
I'm not working on it for a while. Sadly I am with no time, but trying
to escape to return. :(
2016-03-26 16:27 GMT-03:00 Martijn Rijkeboer <mart...@bunix.org>:
> Hi,
>
> Just out of curiosity, what has happend with WAPBL? There were some patches
> floating around on tech@
Hi,
Just out of curiosity, what has happend with WAPBL? There were some patches
floating around on tech@ in the last months of 2015, but then it became
quiet. I'm not complaining just curious.
Kind regards,
Martijn Rijkeboer
13 matches
Mail list logo