On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 23:26:08 -0600 Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > We are waiting a dochelp response from ms. In addition more data on the > perf penalty of cutting the wsize in half would help. In any case thecmore > serious problem is ignoring the write error not the wsize default We know there'll be a perf penalty, and I've done some rough numbers that show about a 30% decrease in some tests. The question is -- is it a good idea to default to mount options that give better performance at the expense of interoperability? My vote is no -- the defaults should be as safe as possible, but we should allow people to set the wsize higher if they choose. That's what the proposed patch does. Also, most applications do not ignore write() errors, but a lot of applications ignore errors on close(). Even the ones that do check for errors on close() can't usually do much about it other than to log the error or crash. It's therefore advantageous to avoid that situation entirely if we can. The dochelp response won't mean much, IMO. We know there are servers with this limitation in the field, but they work with Windows. The casual user will see that Windows works against those servers and Linux corrupts data, and will conclude that Linux blows. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
