Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Shared painShared painPosted Feb 2, 2012 22:13 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)In reply to: Shared pain by tconnors Parent article: XFS: the filesystem of the future?
no, rename is an atomic barrier from the point of view of your software on the running machine.
however if the filesystem does not get unmounted cleanly, all guarantees are off. This has always been the case in Unix.
(Log in to post comments)
Shared pain Posted Feb 2, 2012 23:27 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Unix is dead, sorry. On Linux you have filesystems which was was unreliable against crashes at all (ext, ext2, etc) or which guarantee atomicity across reboots (ext3, ext4, btrfs). Oh, and there are XFS, too - looks like it's developers finally understood that filesystems exist to support applications, not the other way around (even if XFS fanbois didn't) P.S. Yes, ext4 and btrfs also had the problem under discussion. But they were quickly fixed.
|
|||||||||||||