Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 9/10/06, Chuck Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Could a kill -9 prevent data from reaching disk for files that were
previously closed?
No. After a close() the OS should have all the data... the process
may be killed but the OS will eventually flush all the buffers, etc.
File creation is pretty much always synchronous so I have no idea how
your problem could have happened (missing segment files). IO error or
something else temporarily filling up the disk?
If you have a power loss or crash, then that *can* cause data loss.
There may be mount options to make more file operations synchronous,
or you could maybe write your own Directory implementation to make
things more synchronous.
Agreed ... it's hard to explain how this could have occurred without
the OS / machine actually going down abruptly.
Is this all on a single machine, local filesystem?
Are you really sure your underlying IO system is "healthy", no silent
file system corruption going on or anything?
However, I do think it would be a good idea to [optionally] add a
sync() call on committing the segments file to still be robust to OS /
machine crashing... it would slow down performance of indexing but
hopefully not by too much since the segments file is small.
Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
