On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 09:43:21AM +0000, John Hodrien wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>I'm glad it helped. FWIW, we're considering adding a nosync option to
>the cache as well at some point, which should have the same performance
>effect as using tmpfs except the cache would be persistent (otoh, if
>sssd was killed during the transaction, the cache might got
>corrupt..which is why always sync by default)
Sounds like a great option to add. If you can't sanity check it, just
deleting it if you don't know that it's been cleanly written may work?
Yes, that might be one idea, write some 'canary' on shutdown and start
fresh if the canary was not there.
Coming up in 1.14..