Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 14 Feb 1999 01:30:11 -0500 (EST) | From | Gregory Maxwell <> | Subject | Re: fsync on large files |
| |
On Sat, 13 Feb 1999, Simon Kirby wrote:
> Hmm...I have yet to find the fsync()ing useful...I agree that it > could help log something helpful, but I don't see disabling fsync() as a > kludge, though. Perhaps you should try remote logging and disabling > fsync() on the remote machine? If the logging server goes down for > whatever reason, you can enable fsync() again if you want to see if you > can get a better trace of it (it could just be spat to the console > anyhow), but if any other server goes down it should be logged there.
Or.. You could have multiple logging servers... The changes of both going down are slim.. Infact, if you are sick enough you could perhaps setup an alias interface with on each of them with the same IP and configure firewalling to ignore everything on that interface except for syslog traffic. Since syslog is UDP, this would probably work and keep the remote servers from having to send n* packets for n computers.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |