[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: FW: [otto.wyss@csam.com: XFree 4.0.1-8 crashes my systemcompletl y, how can I retrieve inf ormation fora bug report]



 To temporary set disk io to syncronous writes:

# mount -o remount,sync /

  do testing

# mount -o remount,async /

Regards,
/Karl

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Hammar                    Aspö Data           karl@kalle.csb.ki.se
Lilla Aspö 2340             +46  173 140 57                    Networks
S-742 94 Östhammar         +46  70 511 97 84                  Computers
Sweden                                                       Consulting
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Seth Arnold <sarnold@willamette.edu>
Subject: Re: FW: [otto.wyss@csam.com: XFree 4.0.1-8 crashes my systemcompletl y, how can I retrieve inf ormation fora bug report]
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 15:58:57 -0800

...
> > There is absolute nothing in the log (disk), probably because the cache
> > doesn't get flushed to disk. I guess there is nothing I could do to
> > force a flush in short intervalls. Is there any easy way to redirect the
> > output to another computer (running MacOS!) over the net? 
> 
> Ok. I think we can defeat this one. If you don't mind playing with your
> /etc/fstab file, you can change the partition that contains your
> /var/log directory to be a synchronous mount. This of course will slow
> things down a bit, but not by a terrible amount. (This is how the *BSDs
> did their disk IO before Kirk McKusick invented SoftUpdates to get the
> safety of synchronous writes with the speed of async mounts. :)
> 
> The other option is to have an endless loop of running sync(1). Someone
> posted something similar not so long ago, but I am lousy at shell
> scripting. The following C might do the job. :)
> 
> int main(void) {
> 	while(1) {
> 		if (system("/bin/sync") != 0)
> 			break;
> 	}
> }
> 
> (Hmm. The system(3) manpage suggests this is very bad; however, since
> the machine crashes anyway, it might not be horrible. Read the manpage
> though and see if you can live with this before trying this version. :)
> 
> (A perl version wouldn't look much different, I don't think. If you
> would rather use perl, I could dredge up my perl memories. :)
...


Reply to: