Posted Mar 26, 2009 12:53 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Parent article: Quotes of the week
Well, Tom's comment is utterly inaccurate on Linux systems, where sync(2) definitely is a blocking call, and where there *is* no character special device corresponding to block devices for fsck to use.
(I agree with most of the rest of what Tom says, but his BSD focus is so extreme that he seems to have forgotten that systems exist which do not use kernels descended from the ancient Unix ones. The man is *defending* ritual triple-sync(8), for goodness' sake!)
But this is fairly strong evidence that tytso's promised land of everyone fsync()ing before rename() is never going to come to pass.