(cc' list trimmed)
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 01:35:00PM -0400, Jan Harkes wrote:
Deadly for Coda, every fsync triggers an upcall to userspace,
which costs at least 2 context switches and a whole bunch of
network traffic as updates are sent back to the server, i.e. the
fact that some parent has a new child or timestamp is not related
to or interesting for this delivery.
would limiting it to just the parent dentry be acceptable?
- fsync(dir) is an _explicit_ indication by an application that
actually cares what precisely needs to be written to disk.
i though nothing used it (maybe qmail?)
- fsync(dir) doesn't negatively affect applications that don't care.
fsync(dir) or fsync(file)?
- The proposed patch doesn't solve the 'oops I relinked the file,
or I renamed a parent' problems where the path leading to a file
is lost anyways.
And the relinking is exactly what is done by both qmail and
cyrus imap, i.e. this patch wouldn't even solve the problem that
is being discussed.
cryrus/qmail do link("tmp_place", "store/where_i_want_it") ?
do they also do fsync(open("store")) ?
--cw
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 21:00:33 EST