User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Crash-only Linux?

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 29, 2010 17:50 UTC (Fri) by MattPerry (guest, #46341)
In reply to: Crash-only Linux? by cpeterso
Parent article: A module for crashing the kernel

I couldn't agree more. I yearn for the days when the OS was always in a state where it could be powered down. Are you done using your computer? Just turn the power switch off. Now we have to "shutdown" which is a pain and takes time. I'd prefer the system was always in a state ready to be turned off safely, even it if took longer to operate.


(Log in to post comments)

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 29, 2010 17:56 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

Interesting...the only machine I've ever used that could just be turned off was a Data General Nova with core memory; turn it on, and it just picked up where it left off. Every other system I've ever used was unhappy with an abrupt turn-off.

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 29, 2010 18:08 UTC (Fri) by clugstj (subscriber, #4020) [Link]

DOS never had a "shutdown" command AFAIR. When you were done w/ your IBM PC, you flipped the power switch - of course, you never did this while it was writing to your (floppy) drives.

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 29, 2010 18:33 UTC (Fri) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

.. or when you were writing to your hard drive.

you can do this today with linux, just mount all your filesystems syncronously and you will have a system that you can shutdown at any time that it's not writing to your disk.

you will also have a system that you will find unusably slow, you don't realize how much you gain from not waiting for writes to hit disk before continuing.

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Feb 1, 2010 13:29 UTC (Mon) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]

Actually it's quite viable to use synchronous writes on filesystems - that's how I set up all my Linux systems, having had some major hassles with data corruption on ext3. There is some performance hit but it's still a lot faster than my Windows XP laptop which has about the same CPU and RAM.

See http://lwn.net/Articles/350072/ for the details - however, I now think that the only problem is not having synchronous writes, and that LVM is largely OK. This makes sense given that LVM is used a lot in enterprise Linux servers.

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 30, 2010 16:57 UTC (Sat) by filipjoelsson (guest, #2622) [Link]

AFAIR you had to park the harddrive on most systems with such a device back in the day, so that wasn't universal. The Commodore 64 OTOH, was an instant off computer. ;)

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 30, 2010 18:03 UTC (Sat) by SimonKagstrom (subscriber, #49801) [Link]

Only if you weren't saving something to the tape!

Anyway, you can use halt -f to achieve the same thing you a Linux computer. You can probably also bind it to the ACPI event when the power button is pressed to get the desired behavior. The less brave among us would do a sync first :-)

Crash-only Linux?

Posted Jan 30, 2010 18:19 UTC (Sat) by MattPerry (guest, #46341) [Link]

My Amiga would allow you to to turn it off when you were done. No shutdown needed. This was a very unix-ish, fast, multitasking OS.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds