lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Ext4 and the "30 second window of death"
    On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 09:50:10PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
    >
    > But still, you're right. In some cases, you really want "fsync()" to
    > mean "fsync()". I'm not sure how often such applications _should_ be

    Hmm. This is starting to sound a lot like the OSX fsync (
    http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/Reference/Manpages/man2/fsync.2.html
    ) where there is effectively a "fsync harder" syscall
    (F_FULLFSYNC fcntl11).

    > If all they are doing is browsing the web, and the issue is firefox's
    > desire to constantly write to their home directory, the user should be
    > able to say, "you know, my battery life is more important that making
    > sure that every last web page I visit is saved away in some file ---
    > Firefox's 'Awesome Bar' really isn't worth that much to me."

    The "Awesome(bar) Firefox 3 fsync Problem" isn't that you are missing a
    day's worth of browsing. The issue is that the sqlite database might
    become corrupt and lose _all history_ if fsync lies/doesn't happen and a
    crash occurs ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=435712#c10).
    With Firefox 2 there was a file swap happening so an fsync wasn't vital.

    Just out of curiosity, when laptop mode is happening is there a
    guarantee that writes to other files won't be reordered to before the
    fsync?

    --
    Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-04-01 07:23    [W:2.487 / U:0.400 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site