It is sad to see people attack Ted here for simply pointing out bugs in applications. Once upon a time, people associated with Linux would tell Windows folks that we're all for open specifications and well documented behaviour. But, when it comes to the behaviour of one file system in one of its modes which was masking incorrect usage of the API, we quickly revert to screaming bloody murder and asking for more hand holding. How did that come about?
On the other hand, nobody is complaining about this:
> On some rather common Linux configurations, especially using the ext3 filesystem in the data=ordered mode, calling fsync doesnt just flush out the data for the file its called on, but rather on all the buffered data for that filesystem.
That seems like the real problem to me. If I ask for fsync on _my_ file, why on earth does the file system flush the lot out? Shouldn't _that_ be fixed instead?
Not to mention the problem of indiscriminately writing out hundreds of configuration files, when nobody actually changed anything in them.