>>>>> "fc" == Frank Cusack <fcus...@fcusack.com> writes:
>> Dropping a flush-cache command is just as bad as dropping a
>> write.
fc> Not that it matters, but it seems obvious that this is wrong
fc> or anyway an exaggeration. Dropping a flush-cache just means
fc> that you have to wait until the device is quiesced before the
fc> data is consistent.
fc> Dropping a write is much much worse.
backwards i think. Dropping a flush-cache is WORSE than dropping the
flush-cache plus all writes after the flush-cache. The problem that
causes loss of whole pools rather than loss of recently-written data
isn't that you're writing too little. It's that you're dropping the
barrier and misordering the writes. consequently you lose *everything
you've ever written,* which is much worse than losing some recent
writes, even a lot of them.
pgp0bxNk2dBD0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
