From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <24c460af78ee854a80f3d25351fde2aa@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
From: Fco.J.Ballesteros <nemo@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Fossil; is the time right?
In-Reply-To: <bd1e305747386c4bc809c7aafcb2424d@vitanuova.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="upas-sklmgjmwykoqoalezadocbjjsg"
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 15:57:41 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8020ac3e-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--upas-sklmgjmwykoqoalezadocbjjsg
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I don't know.
But I know that if I dont sync by hand using the console
I loose some blocks (some of the last changes may be missing).

I use this halt:

#!/bin/rc
while () {
	echo fsys main fync >>/srv/fscons
}

And wait until I see that for several calls there's no
dirty block.

Any better way?
--upas-sklmgjmwykoqoalezadocbjjsg
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by aquamar; Fri Mar 14 14:38:24 MET 2003
Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.8.6])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP
	id 5D45419A0B; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 08:38:09 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Received: from rapido.vitanuova.com (unknown [62.254.170.97])
	by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with SMTP id 61AA5199D7
	for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 08:37:02 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <bd1e305747386c4bc809c7aafcb2424d@vitanuova.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Fossil; is the time right?
From: rog@vitanuova.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu
X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu>
List-Archive: <https://lists.cse.psu.edu/archives/9fans/>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 13:39:50 0000

it's been stable for me...  for all of two days, running it on my
laptop :-).  it's survived lots of rebooting, and kernel crashing,
with no probs, as advertised.

it seems quite a lot slower than kfs (a naive measurement showed that
it read 15MB 50% slower than kfs).  presumably this will change if
it gets a read cache.

i have one query about its integrity: soft updates preserve the
integrity of the write buffer; venti is log structured, and has no
problem with being killed.

however, i wonder if it's possible to "lose" a block in between fossil
and venti if one is running venti -w.  e.g.  fossil writes a block to
venti, marks it as archived, reuses that block, and then the machine
crashes before venti has got around to actually writing the block.

how does fossil guard against such an eventuality?

  cheers,
    rog.

--upas-sklmgjmwykoqoalezadocbjjsg--