Evan Jones wrote: > On Aug 13, 2010, at 7:57 , Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Just out of curiosity, what do you see when the write cache is on? >> Seems counter-intuitive that it'd work better, but talking w/ >> Ric Wheeler, he was curious... maybe Intel didn't test with the >> write cache off? > > Data loss is much easier to trigger with the write cache on. It happens > to me on the first try. With the write cache off, I've only been able to > get it to occur with large writes (64 kB or larger), and only about once > every 3 times. Ok, so working as expected then, really. ... >> Also, would you be willing to publish the test you're using? > > The programs I have been using are here (but see below): > > http://people.csail.mit.edu/evanj/hg/index.cgi/hstore/file/tip/logging/minlogcrash.c > > http://people.csail.mit.edu/evanj/hg/index.cgi/hstore/file/tip/logging/logfilecrashserver.cc Cool, thanks for publishing all that info, a few people have done power loss testing, always interesting to see what's been put together. I'll take a closer look at some point... -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
