Return to the archive index

Re: [Wear-Hard] Re: follow up.

On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 01:08:31PM -0500, Seth W. Klein wrote:
> Rick Jones <> wrote:
> > 
> > Has anyone tried noflushd with ext3 - or is that just
> > overkill?  Or for that matter has anyone done power
> > comparisons of noflushd vs ext3.
> 
> I think you're confused. As the man page states, the reason to not
> use ext3 with noflushd is that ext3 will spin the disk up to write
> its journal even if noflushd holds the actual write in (memory)
> cache. So ext3 defeats the purpose of noflushd.

although, for those who want both, it might be feasible to use an
external journal on a flash card.  while this would wear out the 
flash eventually, (being mostly used for writes), it should allow one
to use happy ext3 for power failures while reaping the benefits of 
spinning down the disk.  the flash would have to be readable at the
time ext3 is initialized to find external journal, which is doable
on most systems (especially those with built in cf-ide ports).

not sure if it's worth it though.  at the very least, noone wants to 
sit through a 20gb fsck when on battery power.

--francois

--
Subscription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to 
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org
Please, *PLEASE* don't subscribe through a forward/expander/false domain

From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail