It is not just database by the way, any journaling file system would
be pointless...
On Nov 19, 2008, at 12:55 PM, robert engels wrote:

The "utility" referenced no longer exists... and its no wonder.

If is most likely that the tester did not have the drives
configured properly.

In almost all cases, if the drive did this, you could not run a
database system with any resiliency.

They would also have problems with shutdown - although as the
comments indicate Windows added a "delay" to try and fix this.

There is a chance that these drives just had bugs that caused the
cache to not be written properly, but that is probably very rare.

More likely, they were testing higher end drives that have this as
an option. If your system is fault tolerant, with back power
supplies, etc. then having the drive do lazy writing, even in
response to sync, can drastically improve the performance - but you
need to make sure the rest of the system is configured for this.

I guess if you buy completely crappy hardware, or a bad system
configuration, you get what you pay for.

On Nov 19, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Jason Rutherglen wrote:


On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Mark Miller
/A look at the slashdot article seems to indicate the OS may have
been at fault in his case (an update he posted in response to some
slashdot flames). Thats interesting. Wasnt there the last time
this topic came up. Can't remember what java db had the other
info...but looking...


To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 16 of 16 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupjava-dev @
postedNov 19, '08 at 2:33p
activeNov 19, '08 at 6:59p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase