Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Mar 1996 13:30:53 -0500 (EST) | From | John Gardiner Myers <> | Subject | Re: imapd and synchronous writes |
| |
Alan Cox <alan@cymru.net> writes: > Not true. If you have any modern disk controller that re-orders writes > from its internal cache then you potentially lose.
My impression was that other filesystems waited until the disk controller reported back that it had committed the writes to non-volatile storage before returning. It didn't matter how the writes were ordered.
> There are file systems > other than the Linux one that do async writes and will have the same > properties.
Which ones?
> Add it to gnu autoconf
I would if I knew how. What is it that am I supposed to test for?
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU> writes: > Well, now that you know, you can do it. An application which does an > open() on the directory, followed by a fsync(), shouldn't break on a > broad range of unix systems.
I need a "feature" test I can check for in order to enable this code only on the systems that need it. I'm not particularly enthusiastic about taking a performance hit on my primary platforms (Solaris, etc) in order to pander to a fringe OS that decided to play fast and loose with the filesystem semantics.
-- _.John G. Myers Internet: jgm+@CMU.EDU LoseNet: ...!seismo!ihnp4!wiscvm.wisc.edu!give!up
| |