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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: fsync() madness
From:       Luciano Montanaro <mikelima () cirulla ! net>
Date:       2008-04-21 15:48:18
Message-ID: 200804211748.19231.mikelima () cirulla ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 21 April 2008 17:25:47 Gary Greene wrote:
> On Monday 21 April 2008 8:15:51 am Sami Liedes wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 02:11:40PM +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > > On Sunday 20 of April 2008, Sami Liedes wrote:
> > > > 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?
> >
> > The patch is simple and not very fine grained, but effective and
> > shouldn't break anything unless a power loss happens. Attached.
> >
> > 	Sami
>
> Again you are not taking into account XFS. How many times must we iterate
> over this.... _If you don't have the code check which FS this is on and
> PROPERLY deal with this, you will kill users data._

Technically, it would be XFS that would do that.

Alternatively, the user has made a choice that he *could* regret. Or he could 
be lucky, and fail to experience any data loss.

So do we want to force a penalty for every user out there just to spare some 
potential grief to the tiny minority using an XFS filesystem?

We should also consider that other programs out there are not so zealous in 
protecting user data... so if this were a real issue, people would steer away 
from the filesystem.

Luciano

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]