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:4.108 / U:0.092 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site