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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: fsync() madness
From:       Sami Liedes <sliedes () cc ! hut ! fi>
Date:       2008-04-21 15:40:13
Message-ID: 20080421154013.GK8760 () nun4 ! kyla ! fi
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 08:25:47AM -0700, 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._

Without a power loss? I don't think so. And data loss on power loss is
expected to happen on any write back caching fs (i.e. not mounted
noasync) on power loss. Care to still iterate once?

(BTW, I didn't understand your "tell that to XFS developers". Did you
misread what I wrote when you replied that way?)

	Sami

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<


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