Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.Hawaii.Edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!newshub.tc.umn.edu!mr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!uknet!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!edcogsci!richard From: richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) Subject: Re: async X-Nntp-Posting-Host: pitcairn Message-ID: <Dyr8MF.9Gp@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> Sender: cnews@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software) Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh References: <3252f11b.1314289@news.hol.gr> <32537E48.500F9F30@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:08:39 GMT Lines: 24 In article <32537E48.500F9F30@FreeBSD.org> "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@FreeBSD.org> writes: >"BAD" is probably a bit strong. To be perfectly honest, most of us run >our machines with async turned on now too and I, for one, have yet to >experience any significant data loss, even with experimental kernels >occasionally panic'ing my system. Naturally, how bad it is depends what you're doing when it crashes. If there's a lot of simultaneous file creation and deletion it's likely to be much worse. Of course, this is just the situation where it's a big win. I'd keep async for things like installation and full restores, where you'd start from scratch if it crashed. Using it on /tmp is another reasonable idea, though you might prefer to use a memory file system. Jordan, what are the practical situations where you find it makes a useful difference? Are they ones (like compiling) where simply ensuring that temporary files are on a mfs is almost as good? -- Richard -- "Nothing can stop me now... except microscopic germs"