* De: Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2003-01-23 ]
[ Subjecte: Re: Test this! Patch to make newfs(8) use libufs. ]
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
> > * De: Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Data: 2003-01-23 ]
> > [ Subjecte: Re: Test this! Patch to make newfs(8) use libufs. ]
> > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Juli Mallett wrote:
> > > > Thanks to Ruslan's reminder that tunefs now uses libufs and tunefs is
> > > > one of the crunched programs, I realised that I really needed to make
> > > > newfs(8) use libufs. To show off that it *can* help us reduce space,
> > > > a good bit in some cases.
> > >
> > > Good to see this. Does libufs do an fsync() in bwrite() or do you need to
> > > do that manually in place of the previous calls to wtfsflush()?
> >
> > It doesn't. Do you think it should? I'd rather do that than litter the
> > newfs code.
>
> Not needed. On second look, I see you removed the wc[] caching and fall
> back to just write(). (BTW, what's the performance difference with your
> patch?) If newfs doesn't complete successfully due to a system crash, it
> doesn't matter if data written was flushed to disk, just run it again.
*nod*. Not to mention that I don't think you need it for writing to a raw
device?
As for performance, I don't know. Test it and find out? :)
--
Juli Mallett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AIM: BSDFlata -- IRC: juli on EFnet.
OpenDarwin, Mono, FreeBSD Developer.
ircd-hybrid Developer, EFnet addict.
FreeBSD on MIPS-Anything on FreeBSD.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
