| To: | Martin Steigerwald <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 14 Dec 2015 01:58:23 -0800 |
| Cc: | Georg Sch?nberger <g.schoenberger@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux FS-Devel <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Block mailing list <linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS mailing list <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3911767.qVqsL1TcMv@merkaba> |
| References: | <E127700EFE58FD45BD6298EAC813FA42020D8173@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3496214.YTSKClH6pV@merkaba> <566E6524.6070401@xxxxxxxxxx> <3911767.qVqsL1TcMv@merkaba> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:38:56AM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Is it safe to use XFS (or any other filesystem) on enterprise SSDs with Power > Loss Protection (PLP), i.e. some capacitor to provide for enough electricity > to write out all data in DRAM to flash after a power loss, with a reordering > I/O scheduler like CFQ? If the device does not need cache flushes it should not report requiring flushes, in which case nobarrier will be a noop. Or to phrase it differently: If nobarrier makes a difference skipping it is not safe. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs, Martin Steigerwald |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs, Georg Schönberger |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs, Martin Steigerwald |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS and nobarrier with SSDs, Georg Schönberger |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |