[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: fsync() madness
From:       Lubos Lunak <l.lunak () suse ! cz>
Date:       2008-04-21 12:11:40
Message-ID: 200804211411.40560.l.lunak () suse ! cz
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 20 of April 2008, Sami Liedes wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 07:27:54PM +0000, letto wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 April 2008 14:41:19 Sami Liedes wrote:
> > > Well, I read those threads and everyone there seems to think it's no
> > > major performance hit.
> >
> > What are you talking about? I've read those threads and it seems that
> > this behaviour was only necesarry for xfs and that it was planned to make
> > it detect fs at run-time and only fsync when necesarry. See this message
> > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=119453925805510&w=2
>
> I had missed that post. Still, no analysis of the performance hit
> there, and I think the attitude of "no data loss at all allowed at any
> power loss, implement at any cost to performance" is misguided.

 Tell that to XFS developers and their users. Anyway, where's your patch?

-- 
Lubos Lunak
KDE developer
--------------------------------------------------------------
SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: l.lunak@suse.cz , l.lunak@kde.org
Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
Czech Republic       http://www.suse.cz
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]