From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763302AbZCaPb3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:31:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762846AbZCaPai (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:30:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.moondrake.net ([212.85.150.166]:39730 "EHLO mx1.mandriva.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763155AbZCaPag (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:30:36 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1715 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:30:35 EDT X-Spam-Virus: No To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Linus Torvalds , Matthew Garrett , Alan Cox , Theodore Tso , Andrew Morton , David Rees , Jesper Krogh , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29 X-URL: <20090327055750.GA18065@srcf.ucam.org> <20090327062114.GA18290@srcf.ucam.org> <20090327112438.GQ6239@mit.edu> <20090327145156.GB24819@srcf.ucam.org> <20090327150811.09b313f5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090327152221.GA25234@srcf.ucam.org> <20090327161553.31436545@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090327162841.GA26860@srcf.ucam.org> <20090327165150.7e69d9e1@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090327170208.GA27646@srcf.ucam.org> <49CD2C47.4040300@garzik.org> <49CD4DDF.3000001@garzik.org> <49CD7B10.7010601@garzik.org> From: Thierry Vignaud Organization: Mandriva Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:01:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: <49CD7B10.7010601@garzik.org> (Jeff Garzik's message of "Fri\, 27 Mar 2009 21\:19\:12 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik writes: > > Of course, your browsing history database is an excellent example of > > something you should _not_ care about that much, and where > > performance is a lot more important than "ooh, if the machine goes > > down suddenly, I need to be 100% up-to-date". Using fsync on that > > thing was just stupid, even > > If you are doing a ton of web-based work with a bunch of tabs or > windows open, you really like the post-crash restoration methods that > Firefox now employs. Some users actually do want to > checkpoint/restore their web work, regardless of whether it was the > browser, the window system or the OS that crashed. This is all about tradeoff. I guess everybody can afford loosing the last 30 seconds of history (or 5mn ...). That's not that much of lost work...