Subject: Re: changing default for UFS_DIRHASH and NEW_BUFQ_STRATEGY
To: matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au>
From: Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@rek.tjls.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 06/05/2005 00:04:46
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 04:55:21AM +1000, matthew green wrote:
> 
> did you not quote this part of sean's message on purpose?
> 
>    "I've had it happen with just softdep, and with just new_bufq. The effects
>    are more severe with just new_bufq."

I didn't quote it because it was totally irrelevant to what was actually
in his original message, which we were discussing: his claim that when
he turned _both_ features on, his sytem misbehaved, and that therefore
we should not make _one_ of them the default.

I don't find that persuasive, to say the least, but if he doesn't care
if he persuades me or not, by all means, he should continue to make
"X and Y and Z, therefore if X, Z" statements and fill in the useful
details later!

-- 
 Thor Lancelot Simon	                                      tls@rek.tjls.com

"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be
 abandoned or transcended, there is no problem."		- Noam Chomsky