[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: softupdates recommendation



Quoting Marco Peereboom (marco_(_at_)_peereboom_(_dot_)_us):
> I use softupdates just about everywhere. Sure there are corner cases
> where one can loose some data however I (usually) prefer the
> performace boost over the potential to loose data. Keywords here are
> UPS, stability and easily recreated/restored data.

I might be wrong here but:

1. If you cannot afford to loose some data your program should use
fsync(2) to flush the in-core state down to the disk. If the semantics
in OpenBSD is not that way, I would like to know how I can do it safely.
At least that is the original semantics of fsync(2) as far as I know. 

FreeBSD seems to support the thing written above at least. 

2. By using softupdates you trade memory for speed. I do not know if
this issue is real though as I do not know how much memory the
dependency graph uses memory.

-- 
j.