lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [patch] `cp /dev/zero /tmp' (patch against 2.2.9)
Hi,

On Sun, 20 Jun 1999 15:45:02 +0200 (CEST), Andrea Arcangeli
<andrea@suse.de> said:

> I think the major issue with fsync is having to read from disk in order to
> complete the operation. The fact that we don't have to lookup the buffer
> cache anymore to check if there's a dirty buffer in memory will sure cut
> down the complexity of the operation, but according to me the real issue
> is to avoid read-I/O from disk (think if you have only one block dirty in
> the metadata (after an append of data to an inode), in such case you don't
> want to generate lots of read-I/O just to write 1k to disk).

> fdatasync instead is just _fine_ in this regard.

No it isn't. fdatasync has exactly the same requirements here as
fsync. The only things which fdatasync is allowed to skip are the
inode timestamps; all other inode and metadata modifications must
still be synced.

--Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.109 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site