Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
(Nearly) full tickless operation in 3.10
If even *coreutils*, written by some of the most insanely
portability-minded Unix hackers on the planet, doesn't do this
fsync()-source-and-target-directories thing, it's safe to say that, to a
first approximation, nobody ever does it.
The standard here is outvoted by reality.
Ts'o: Delayed allocation and the zero-length file problem
Posted Mar 14, 2009 14:20 UTC (Sat) by endecotp (guest, #36428)
- Since mv doesn't fsync and mv is expected to leave things in a sane state after a crash, the kernel must be expected to "do the right thing" wrt rename().
- Since mv doesn't sync, mv is not guaranteed to leave things in a sane state after a crash; if you thought that it was guaranteed to do so you were wrong.
Posted Mar 14, 2009 15:25 UTC (Sat) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
But on a journalled fs like ext3 users will expect their system to be robust in the event of a crash -- and as the XFS debacle shows, not only for metadata. Both are POSIX-compliant, only ext3 is held to higher standards than ext2. What this means for ext4 is obvious.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds