User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

POSIX v. reality: A position on O_PONIES

POSIX v. reality: A position on O_PONIES

Posted Sep 9, 2009 21:08 UTC (Wed) by vaurora (guest, #38407)
In reply to: POSIX v. reality: A position on O_PONIES by kjp
Parent article: POSIX v. reality: A position on O_PONIES

My understanding is that the patches you are talking about only decrease the likelihood of the rename() data loss problem outside of ext3 with data=ordered mode. E.g.:

commit e7c8f5079ed9ec9e6eb1abe3defc5fb4ebfdf1cb
Author: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Date: Fri Apr 3 01:34:49 2009 -0400

ext3: Add replace-on-rename hueristics for data=writeback mode

In data=writeback mode, start an asynchronous flush when renaming a
file on top of an already-existing file. This lowers the probability
of data loss in the case of applications that attempt to replace a
file via using rename().

---

If you aren't sure, I recommend using ext3 with the explicit data=ordered option until you've had the opportunity to sit down and understand the data=writeback and/or ext4 semantics.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds