Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Mar 2004 20:12:28 +0100 | From | Christoffer Hall-Frederiksen <> | Subject | Re: True fsync() in Linux (on IDE) |
| |
Matthias Andree wrote: > Jens Axboe schrieb am 2004-03-22: > > >>There's no such thing as atomic writes bigger than a sector really, we >>just pretend there is. Timing usually makes this true.
;)
> > If there is no such atomicity (except maybe in ext3fs data=journal or > the upcoming reiserfs4 - isn't there?), then nobody should claim so. If > the kernel cannot 100.00000000% guarantee the write is atomic, claiming > otherwise is plain fraud and nothing else. > > Some people bet their whole business/company and hence a fair deal of > their belongings on a single data base, and making them believe facts > that simply aren't reality is dangerous. These people will have very > little understanding for sloppiness here. Linux has no obligation to be > fast or reliable, but it MUST PROPERLY AND TRUTHFULLY state what it can > guarantee and what it cannot guarantee.
Some databases (eg. oracle) can write a checksum for each database page to overcome this problem, as this is not just "a linux problem".
-- Christoffer
Topper Harley: Interesting perfume. Ramada Thompson: It's Vicks. I have a cold. - 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/
| |