| |||||||||||||
Atomicity vs durabilityAtomicity vs durabilityPosted Mar 15, 2009 10:37 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302)In reply to: Atomicity vs durability by alexl Parent article: Ts'o: Delayed allocation and the zero-length file problem
Similarly, any file system that on fsync() locks up for several seconds is not a very good one ;-)
(Log in to post comments)
Atomicity vs durability Posted Mar 15, 2009 11:04 UTC (Sun) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] That is why we are willing to replace it in the first place! but not if it means losing in the process its good properties (be them in the spec or not).
Atomicity vs durability Posted Mar 20, 2009 11:24 UTC (Fri) by anton (guest, #25547) [Link] Similarly, any file system that on fsync() locks up for several seconds is not a very good one ;-)If the fsync() has to write out 500MB, I certainly would expect it to take several seconds and the fsync call to block for several seconds. fsync() is just an inherently slow operation. And if an application works around the lack of robustness of a file system by calling fsync() frequently, the application will be slow (even on robust file systems).
|
|||||||||||||