[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Cluster-devel] fallocate vs O_(D)SYNC



On Wed 16-11-11 07:45:50, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:54:13AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> >   Yeah, only that nobody calls that fsync() automatically if the fd is
> > O_SYNC if I'm right. But maybe calling fdatasync() on the range which was
> > fallocated from sys_fallocate() if the fd is O_SYNC would do the trick for
> > most filesystems? That would match how we treat O_SYNC for other operations
> > as well. I'm just not sure whether XFS wouldn't take unnecessarily big hit
> > with this.
> 
> This would work fine with XFS and be equivalent to what it does for
> O_DSYNC now.  But I'd rather see every filesystem do the right thing
> and make sure the update actually is on disk when doing O_(D)SYNC
> operations.
  OK, I don't really have a strong opinion here. Are you afraid that just
calling fsync() need not be enough to push all updates fallocate did to
disk?

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack suse cz>
SUSE Labs, CR


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]