xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS performance issue solved

To: Linux XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS performance issue solved
From: Federico Sevilla III <jijo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:52:15 +0800 (PHT)
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105150820450.16452-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 15 May 2001 at 08:30, Juha Saarinen wrote:
> You might want to experiment with the -a(n), -A1, -W1 flags too. Just
> plain -c1 is probably a tiny bit quicker than -c3 (but it might not
> work with your chip set).

hdparm's -W1 flag turns on the hard drive's write-cacheing, which speeds
things up, but makes unclean power downs more dangerous. Does anyone know
how XFS will handle such an event? While on the ReiserFS mailing list
awhile back, I was under the impression that this could do wonderful
damage to the filesystem, although I don't know how things are now. But
then XFS seems to be infinitely more stable than ReiserFS, and the on-disk
format is much more mature, so maybe (I hope) it handles things
differently.

Also, would anyone know how to force the drive to flush its write-cache
onto disk, like sync makes linux flush its buffers?

 --> Jijo

---
Linux, MS-DOS, and Windows NT ...
... also known as the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>