[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux 2.6.29
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Stefan Richter wrote:
>> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> Mark Lord wrote:
>> [store browser session]
>>>> fsync() isn't going to affect that one way or another
>>>> unless the entire kernel freezes and dies.
>>> ...which is one of the three common crash scenarios listed (and
>>> experienced in the field).
>> To get work done which one really cares about, one can always choose a
>> system which does not crash frequently. Those who run unstable drivers
>> for thrills surely do it on boxes on which nothing important is being
>> done, one would think.
> Once software is perfect, there is definitely a lot of useless crash
> protection code to remove.

Well, for the time being, why not base considerations for performance,
interactivity, energy consumption, graceful restoration of application
state etc. on the assumption that kernel crashes are suitably rare? (At
least on systems where data loss would be of concern.)
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== -=-= -==-=

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-28 15:41    [W:0.618 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site