On 9/3/15 8:33 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/2/15 9:24 PM, Richard Bade wrote: ... >> The reason I am asking about this is that we are seeing some >> significant I/O delays on the disks causing a “SCSI Task Abort” from >> the OS. This seems to be triggered by the drive receiving a >> “Synchronize cache command”. My current thinking is that setting no >> barriers will stop the drive receiving a sync command and therefore >> stop the I/O delay associated with it. > > Interesting, I thought that usually devices with battery-backed cache > will just ignore synchronize cache commands. Or more precisely, the device should advertise itself in such a way that the commands wouldn't be sent, even if nobarrier wasn't specified... -Eric > But if not, then sure, maybe that's the issue. > > -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
