login
Header Space

 
 

Re: Would it be safe to let only reboot do syncs?

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
Date: Friday, April 2, 1993 - 11:00 pm

In article <C4rxH9.K2D@crdnns.crd.ge.com> davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:

Agreed.  System V R3 has a kernel "subprocess" called bdflush which gets
scheduled like any other process and spends its time doing buffer cache
flushing on an age-and-need(LRU) basis.  I believe SVR4 still does this
(Solaris 2 does, but it's SVR4.0.  Anyone here know if "Destiny" or Unixware
still do it this way?

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery                                       bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org

It's not too late to turn back from the "Gates" of Hell...
Linux: the FREE 32-bit operating system, available NOW. Why waaaaaait for NT?
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: Would it be safe to let only reboot do syncs?, Brandon S. Allbery, (Fri Apr 2, 11:00 pm)
speck-geostationary