Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ext3 vs Reiserfs benchmarks | From | "Patrick J. LoPresti" <> | Date | 15 Jul 2002 17:31:07 -0400 |
| |
Chris Mason <mason@suse.com> writes:
> Yes, most mtas do this for queue files, I'm not sure how many do it for > the actual spool file.
Maybe the control files are small enough to fit in one disk block, making the operations atomic in practice. Or something.
> mail server authors are more than welcome to recommend the best > safety/performance combo for their product, and to ask the FS guys > which combinations are safe.
Yeah, but it's a shame if those combinations require performance hits like "synchronous directory updates" or, worse, "fsync() == sync()".
I really wish MTA authors would just support Linux's "fsync the directory" approach. It is simple, reliable, and fast. Yes, it does require Linux-specific support in the application, but that's what application authors should expect when there is a gap in the standards.
- Pat - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |