lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux 2.6.29
> Agreed, we need a middle ground.  We need a transition path that
> recognizes that ext3 won't be the dominant filesystem for Linux in
> perpetuity, and that ext3's data=ordered semantics will someday no
> longer be a major factor in application design. fbarrier() semantics
> might be one approach; there may be others. It's something we need to
> figure out.

Would making close imply fbarrier() rather than fsync() work for this ?
That would give people the ordering they want even if they are less
careful but wouldn't give the media error cases - which are less
interesting.

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-27 20:17    [W:0.637 / U:0.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site