Re: early flushing of data

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Hendrik Visage wrote:

>On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 05:52:35PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote:
>  
>
>>I just thought that discussion of this might interest the list.
>>
>>It is interesting to consider whether one should flush dirty nodes to 
>>disk with only a small delay after they are modified, or keep them in 
>>cache for a longer time.
>>    
>>
>[snip]
>  
>
>>Your thoughts are welcome.
>>    
>>
>
>Being in love with buttons-an-dials, I'd vote for a configurable flush
>setting.
>
>I have the case were one email server (basically a hop in the queue) would do
>well with the longer flushes as the data wouldn't be that long before it's
>shipped out again (given no failure conditions), while I have others which
>I'd like to have it to disk ASAP as it'll be taking awhile before it get's
>moved along again.
>
>Thus a configurable setting (would love/prefer a per mount setting ie.
>one for my log mount, and the other for the email mounts etc.) would
>be nice.
>
>
>
>  
>
Yes, but what should the default be (remember that 97% of users or more 
won't change the default)?

-- 
Hans