Re: Linux 2.6.29

[Jeff Garzik]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Of course, your browsing history database is an excellent example of 
> something you should _not_ care about that much, and where performance is 
> a lot more important than "ooh, if the machine goes down suddenly, I need 
> to be 100% up-to-date". Using fsync on that thing was just stupid, even 

If you are doing a ton of web-based work with a bunch of tabs or windows 
open, you really like the post-crash restoration methods that Firefox 
now employs.  Some users actually do want to checkpoint/restore their 
web work, regardless of whether it was the browser, the window system or 
the OS that crashed.

You may not care about that, but others do care about the integrity of 
the database that stores the active FF state (Web URLs currently open), 
a database which necessarily changes for each URL visited.



As an aside, I find it highly ironic that Firefox gained useful session 
management around the same time that some GNOME jarhead no-op'd GNOME 
session management[1] in X.

	Jeff



[1] http://np237.livejournal.com/22014.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/