* John Snow (js...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On 08/01/2018 06:20 AM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * John Snow (js...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > >> I'd rather do something like this: > >> - Always flush bitmaps to disk on inactivate. > > > > Does that increase the time taken by the inactivate measurably? > > If it's small relative to everything else that's fine; it's just I > > always worry a little since I think this happens after we've stopped the > > CPU on the source, so is part of the 'downtime'. > > > > Dave > > -- > > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK > > > > I'm worried that if we don't, we're leaving behind unusable, partially > complete files behind us. That's a bad design and we shouldn't push for > it just because it's theoretically faster.
Oh I don't care about theoretical speed; but if it's actually unusably slow in practice then it needs fixing. Dave > --js -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
