| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Persistant allocation without zeroing :== bugPersistant allocation without zeroing :== bugPosted Mar 20, 2007 23:46 UTC (Tue) by saffroy (subscriber, #43999)In reply to: Persistant allocation without zeroing :== bug by davecb Parent article: The 2007 Linux Storage and File Systems Workshop
The most common use I see for this feature is to have (more) predictable performance, and no allocation error (ENOSPC) when *writing* to a file (eg. for realtime apps that capture data). If you plan to capture large amounts of data, zeroing blocks is not very convenient...
(Log in to post comments)
Persistant allocation without zeroing :== bug Posted Mar 21, 2007 17:19 UTC (Wed) by davecb (subscriber, #1574) [Link] Oh quite: that's what the GCOS programs wasintended to do. It just didn't succeed.
--dave
Persistant allocation without zeroing :== bug Posted Mar 21, 2007 17:40 UTC (Wed) by davecb (subscriber, #1574) [Link] To be fair, I should comment that preallocation of disk blocksfor write is a **good** idea, and one which the Samba team, amoung others, would welcome. The "impedance mismatch" between FAT and NTFS on one hand and Unix file systems on the other has caused lots of problems wen Unix servers return an out of space indication in circumstances where Windows clients think an error can't happen (;-)) Of course, if the preallocated space isn't written to, I'd hope the blocks would be zeroed on close, and previous to the close, would not be avilable to be read. The latter introduces an impedance mismatch with Unix files opened fro both write and read...
--dave
|
|
||||||||||||