On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 08:13:42AM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > There is at least one thing: RAIDframe doesn't allow enough simultaneously > pending transactions, so everything *really* backs up behind the cache flush. > > Fixing that would require allowing RAIDframe to eat more RAM. Last time I > proposed that, I got a rather negative response here.
It could be optionnal so that everyone is happy, couldn't it? -- Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org
