| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Questions about XFS |
| From: | Jason White <jasonjgw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 17 Mar 2007 11:47:31 +1100 |
| In-reply-to: | <200703161136.32234.Martin@lichtvoll.de> |
| Mail-followup-to: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <200703131440.56678.clflush@chello.be> <45F8CAEA.3050408@list.rakugaki.org> <200703151007.32630.clflush@chello.be> <200703161136.32234.Martin@lichtvoll.de> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 11:36:31AM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Since 2.6.17.7 and enabled write barriers I didn't loose meta data > consistency on my laptop anymore and I can tell you that it crashed a lot > due to my experiments with what not (especially OSS radeon drivers and > beryl;-). I also had some classical power outages. My laptop also supports write barriers, but I leave the battery in place in case there's a power outage; effectively it's operating as a UPS. This might be slightly off-topic, but in choosing a SATA drive for a desktop machine, what features/standard-complaince should one look for in order to ensure that write barriers work? I know this involves flushing the drive cache, but is this support mandatory in any of the applicable standards? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: stop using kmalloc in xfs_buf_get_noaddr, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH 1/18] xfs: kill struct fid/fid_t namespace pollution, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Questions about XFS, Martin Steigerwald |
| Next by Thread: | cache flush support in SATA drives (was: Re: Questions about XFS), Martin Steigerwald |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |