[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: The argument for fs assistance in handling archives
    David Masover wrote:

    > Spam wrote:
    > [...]
    > |> I thought reiser4 had its journaling and atomic commits. Am I
    > |> mistaken? I run reiser4 as primary fs on my test systems and it seem
    > |> to work as expected.
    > consider this:
    > save_file () {
    > write() /* what if the write flushes halfway through
    > * then crashes?

    reiser4 does protect from this. reiserfs v3 does not.

    > */
    > blah() /* what if "blah" crashes? */
    > write()
    > }
    > Some apps need consistency across multiple files, but we don't even have
    > it on a single file. You need a new interface to do that. As you can
    > see, reiser4 has absolutely no way of knowing, anywhere in the above
    > code, when you're done writing -- and when the file is consistent.
    > AFAIK, all that has to be done now for this to work is for them to
    > finish the userland interface to the journalling and atomic commits that
    > already exist for kernel space. But so far, all that is truly atomic is
    > metadata operations -- chmod, mv, mkdir, touch, and rm/rmdir are all
    > atomic, so long as you only use them on a single file/dir. But this has
    > been true in reiserfs3, xfs, ext3, and others.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:2.128 / U:0.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site