From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GexrG-0008Aq-VU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:57:07 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9VHrmOP028070; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:53:48 GMT Received: from ilievnet.com ([84.21.204.200]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9VHoPo7003268 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:50:25 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ilievnet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63E5F221916 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:50:23 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ilievnet.com Received: from ilievnet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ilievnet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KumjfR2wvHqj for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:50:18 +0200 (EET) Received: from [10.0.1.1] (mail.ilievnet.com [10.0.1.1]) by ilievnet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DD7A221915 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:50:18 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <45478CD6.4070502@ilievnet.com> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:50:14 +0200 From: Daniel Iliev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-GB; rv:1.8.0.7) Gecko/20061010 SeaMonkey/1.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] BIG reiserfs problem References: <200610310917.48293.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> <200610311104.01802.uwix@iway.na> <200610311713.27803.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> In-Reply-To: <200610311713.27803.alan@linuxholdings.co.za> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: f904d67d-4872-4ddd-9142-882e6a48816b X-Archives-Hash: 12dd82bf8d9c96650dc8d7e07d94f12b Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Tuesday 31 October 2006 11:04, Uwe Thiem wrote: > >> On 31 October 2006 09:17, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> >>> I find it useful to keep in mind that XFS is a file-system (i.e. a >>> system for files), and not necessarily a severly disk-bound >>> filesystem >>> >> Would you mind to elaborate on this? I simply do not get your point. >> > > Historically SGI was very strong in graphics, and those applicatiosn > tended to generate massive amounts of temporary files that had a short > life and only the final version needs to be written to persistent > storage, very well suited to aggressive caching and other similar > speedups. > > SGI's engineers could get away with this because they could guarantee > that power loss to the machine wouldn't happen, so the potential data > loss on a power outage didn't happen either. This sounds a bit weird to > those of us raised on Intel where we pay close attention to getting > everything on disk ASAP with as little performance loss as possible, > but it's a perfectly reasonable system for an engineer to implement on > the kind of hardware SGI were building. > > That's why I say XFS is designed to not be tightly bound to the physical > disk if the admin chooses to set it up that way, and the file system > becomes more of a collection of directories and files that might never > even be stored on a disk at all > > alan > "..we pay close attention to getting everything on disk ASAP with as little performance loss as possible.." Then I would propose you to use "hdparm -W0 /dev/(what-ever)" to disable the write caching (no matter which FS you use). Nothing can give 100% guarantee against power failure. -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list