| 1 |
Em 16/06/2014 19:52, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@××××××××××.uk> escreveu: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:58:07 -0300, Francisco Ares wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Regarding umounting, it umounts the drive after it is removed, which |
| 6 |
> > looks strange (to say the least) to me. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Udev doesn't know you want to remove the drive until you've pulled it. |
| 9 |
> Apparently, a future release of systemd will be able to predict when you |
| 10 |
> want to remove the drive as it will control everything you do. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
:-) well, by 'unount' I mean getting rid of the mounted tree and mount |
| 14 |
point. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> > Did I miss something? Or, in other words, is there a way of forcing |
| 17 |
> > operations on a usb flash media to always flush buffers and/or caches as |
| 18 |
> > fast as possible? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Mount it with the sync option. On the other hand, this increases the |
| 21 |
> number of writes to the drive, quickly killing performance and slowly |
| 22 |
> killing the drive. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thanks for this, I will use it. This system is an embedded one, the usb |
| 27 |
stick is for eventual data base backups. I'll remember to do as few writes |
| 28 |
as possible to it. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> -- |
| 31 |
> Neil Bothwick |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> We all know what comes after 'X', said Tom, wisely. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks again, |
| 36 |
Francisco |
Archives