On 08/24/2010 03:21 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/24/2010 03:12 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Well, safety is not boolean. Considering to make it mostly safe instead
of completely safe because of the performance doesn't mean that we
should make it completely unsafe.
What is safety then? A vague feeling of "oh today is monday so my data
is safe, but on tuesday I always lose my image data"? Either we promise
to keep data safe or we don't. There is no in between.
Do you drive a car?
Would you buy a car where the breaks are known to not always work? ;)
That's not the case, even with cache=unsafe.
Though in general I agree we shouldn't compromise on data integrity.
That's my point. Either we go for it or we don't.
I don't know how bad the performance regression is, and how large the
integrity risk is. I'd default towards preserving integrity, but maybe
this situation is different.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
