Xref: utzoo comp.protocols.nfs:2015 comp.arch:21503 Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs,comp.arch Subject: Re: Incremental sync()s and using disk idle time Message-ID: Date: 15 Mar 91 01:19:46 GMT References: <28975@cs.yale.edu> <1991Mar12.202238.19586@zoo.toronto.edu> <3254@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> <1991Mar13.194527.28164@zoo.toronto.edu> Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 12 In article <1991Mar13.194527.28164@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: > some infinitesimal fraction of your CPU, and in return you gain a vast > improvement in *how* such problems can be handled, because the software > on the main CPU has a much better idea of the context of the error and > has more resources available to resolve it. Of course, in practice this becomes "print an error message on the console, and return an error indication to the process requesting the action. If the kernel requested it, panic". -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"