> just out of curiousity: how does xfs interact with things like
> noflushd which reduce the disk flushing for more effective ide
> poweroff possibilities ... is the flushing below the fs layer
> so that it should all work transparently or may it result in
> problems with xfs (or journaling fs in general)?
> a lot of thanks in advance
I have never tried noflushd, I see the FAQ says that it does not help with
reiserfs because it bypasses normal delayed write mechanisms, xfs does the
same type of thing, so there may be similar problems. Someone will have
to try it and report back.
Since noflushd appears to be intended to delay writes, and that the writes
will eventually happen, I do not forsee major problems unless you happen
to really lose power in the middle of this, and not have the system memory
saved back to disk. In general when using my laptop with XFS the disk
will spindown if I am just sitting staring at the screen. Turning on the
noatime option (which requires jumping through some hoops for the root
partition) will get rid of a lot of disk I/O. I am not convinced that
noflushd will have much luck stopping XFS from writing to the disk
though, file writes could be delayed, but all metadata and journal
accesses are probably beyond its control.
> thomas graichen <tgr@xxxxxxxxxxx> ... perfection is reached, not
> when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no
> longer anything to take away. --- antoine de saint-exupery