![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Andrew Morton wrote: > A `dirsync' option does make sense though, for the reasons which > Stephen outlined. So we could then have: - (no option) == async, which only syncs file + data on fsync() or O_SYNC (BSD calls this async, it may corrupt file systems because writes are out-of-order) - dirsync, which syncs directories and metadata and causes ordered writes thereof (BSD calls this noasync), no chance of corrupting on-disk structure unrecoverably. - sync, which syncs all filesystem operations (BSD calls this sync also), will have at most 1 dirty block at a time on non-journaled file systems(?) I expect sync to be faster on journalled file systems in that case, because "in-order execution" to journal will probably cause linear writes, while on ext2, it will involve seeking. -- Matthias Andree "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:13 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||