| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:51:44 +0100 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com> Cc: David Chinner <dgc@....com>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>, Valerie Henson <val.henson@...il.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Patch] document ext3 requirements (was Re: [RFD] Incremental fsck) On Tue 2008-01-15 18:44:26, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On Jan 15, 2008 6:07 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote: > > I had write cache enabled on my main computer. Oops. I guess that > > means we do need better documentation. > > Writeback cache on disk in iteself is not bad, it only gets bad if the > disk is not engineered to save all its dirty cache on power loss, > using the disk motor as a generator or alternatively a small battery. > It would be awfully nice to know which brands fail here, if any, > because writeback cache is a big performance booster. Is it? I guess I should try to measure it. (Linux already does writeback caching, with 2GB of memory. I wonder how important disks's 2MB of cache can be). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists