Re: [Patch] document ext3 requirements (was Re: [RFD] Incrementalfsck)

[Pavel Machek]

On Tue 2008-01-15 18:44:26, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2008 6:07 PM, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/