Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-23,: Re: dedicated logging devices

# Re: dedicated logging devices

Leeuw van der, Tim (tim.leeuwvander@nl.unisys.com)
Fri, 9 Jun 2000 07:00:06 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Matthew Kirkwood: "Re: Floppy handling"
- Previous message: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jerry_Lundstr=F6m?=: "Re: [2.2.16] eepro100 driver"

It's far to small for logging, but perhaps for status flags on a particular
transaction? as long as all journaling fs-s keep to a standard.

Might make it easier to keep track of transaction statuses? Well, that is a
solved problem anyways, AFAIK :-) But it might still help? :-)

--Tim

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 09, 2000 at 12:45:51PM +0200, Xuan Baldauf wrote:
>
> Is it reasonable to use the 50 bytes of /dev/nvram for logging or is it
just
> too small?

Far, far, far, far, far too small. You need tens of kB minimum to record
a single filesystem transaction for a complex operation such as a file
delete.

Cheers,
Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Matthew Kirkwood: "Re: Floppy handling"
- Previous message: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jerry_Lundstr=F6m?=: "Re: [2.2.16] eepro100 driver"