lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: vfs: Add MS_FLUSHONFSYNC mount flag
From
Date
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 15:30 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Thu 12-02-09 11:13:37, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
> ...
>
> >> Also that way if you have 8 partitions on a battery-backed blockdev, you
> >> can tune it once, instead of needing to mount all 8 filesystems with the
> >> new option.
> > Yes, but OTOH we should give sysadmin a possibility to enable / disable
> > it on just some partitions. I don't see a reasonable use for that but people
> > tend to do strange things ;) and here isn't probably a strong reason to not
> > allow them.
> >
> > Honza
>
> But nobody has asked for that, have they? So why offer it up a this point?
>
> They could use LD_PRELOAD to make fsync a no-op if they really don't
> care for it, I guess... though that's not easily per-fs either.
>
> But do we really want to go out of our way to enable people to
> short-circuit data integrity paths and then file bugs when their files
> go missing? :)

Well, it is just a matter of using safe defaults. IMHO, a scenario where
the administrator wants to optimize writes to a certain partition and
_explicitly_ clears MS_FLUSHONFSYNC on that superblock is not completely
unreasonable.

> (I guess the blockdev tunable is similarly dangerous, but it more
> clearly meets the explicit need (writecache-safe devices))

If distributions use sane defaults and we document the mount option or
bdev tunable properly I guess it might make sense to allow system
administrators to shoot themselves in the foot.

(By the way, in this patch-set a patch for mount(8) is included.)

- Fernando



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-02-13 02:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and my Meterkast|Read the blog