What's the danger (if any) in setting cycbuffupdate to a really big #?

Russ Allbery rra at stanford.edu
Mon Jan 22 07:56:53 UTC 2001

Jaye Mathisen <mrcpu at internetcds.com> writes:

> I'm assuming that if the system crashed, it may be an issue, but barring
> having to slam back and forth from the beginning of a disk to the end
> when you're updating a big CNFS buffer near the end, why wouldn't I want
> to bump that to say, a few thousand, rather than 25?  If I don't care if
> I lose a few articles in a crash?

I don't see any obvious drawbacks.  The default is chosen to be on the
safe side, but that's why it's configurable.  :)

Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

More information about the inn-workers mailing list