[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-devel
Subject: Re: fsync() madness
From: "Andreas Hartmetz" <ahartmetz () gmail ! com>
Date: 2008-04-21 16:12:28
Message-ID: f3642e6b0804210912m5440310bja04e3ed832372962 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
2008/4/21, Luciano Montanaro <mikelima@cirulla.net>:
>
> 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?
Hey, I use XFS and I don't feel like a tiny minority - it is one of the
better filesystems :)
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.
Right. I use XFS and the frequent "hangs" on disk I/O that I get are a PITA
while using the desktop. I don't care about config files *that* much... what
about a "reliable flag" or something, or even explicit sync?
Another approach is to hold off sync calls for some milliseconds to combine
several calls.
Luciano
>
>
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2008/4/21, Luciano Montanaro <<a \
href="mailto:mikelima@cirulla.net">mikelima@cirulla.net</a>>:</span><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt \
0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Monday 21 April 2008 17:25:47 Gary Greene \
wrote:<br> > On Monday 21 April 2008 8:15:51 am Sami Liedes wrote:<br> > > \
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 02:11:40PM +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote:<br> > > > On \
Sunday 20 of April 2008, Sami Liedes wrote:<br> > > > > I had missed \
that post. Still, no analysis of the performance hit<br> > > > > there, \
and I think the attitude of "no data loss at all allowed at<br> > > > \
> any power loss, implement at any cost to performance" is misguided.<br> \
> > ><br> > > > Tell that to XFS developers and their \
users. Anyway, where's your<br> > > > patch?<br> > ><br> > > \
The patch is simple and not very fine grained, but effective and<br> > > \
shouldn't break anything unless a power loss happens. Attached.<br> > ><br> \
> > Sami<br> ><br> > Again you are not taking \
into account XFS. How many times must we iterate<br> > over this.... _If you \
don't have the code check which FS this is on and<br> > PROPERLY deal with \
this, you will kill users data._<br> <br> <br>Technically, it would be XFS that would \
do that.<br> <br> Alternatively, the user has made a choice that he *could* regret. \
Or he could<br> be lucky, and fail to experience any data loss.<br> <br> So do we \
want to force a penalty for every user out there just to spare some<br> potential \
grief to the tiny minority using an XFS filesystem?</blockquote><div><br>Hey, I use \
XFS and I don't feel like a tiny minority - it is one of the better filesystems \
:) <br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid \
rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> We should also \
consider that other programs out there are not so zealous in<br> protecting user \
data... so if this were a real issue, people would steer away<br> from the \
filesystem.</blockquote><div><br>Right. I use XFS and the frequent "hangs" \
on disk I/O that I get are a PITA while using the desktop. I don't care about \
config files *that* much... what about a "reliable flag" or something, or \
even explicit sync?<br> Another approach is to hold off sync calls for some \
milliseconds to combine several calls.<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" \
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; \
padding-left: 1ex;"> Luciano<br> <br><br></blockquote></div>
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic