Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> I understand but disabling cache is not an option for anyone I know. So
> I need to know the other :)
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
Come on, how many people/organizations do you know who really need 30+ MB/s
sustained write throughtput in the disk subsystem but can't afford a
battery backed controller at the same time?
Something must take care of writing data in the disk cache on permanent
storage; write-thru caches, battery backed controllers, write barriers
are all alternatives, choose the one you like most.
The problem here is fsync(). We know that not fsync()'ing gives you a big
performance boost, but that's not the point. I want to choose, and I want
a true fsync() when I ask for one. Because if the data don't make it to
the disk cache, the whole point about wt, bb and wb is moot.
.TM.
