On Thursday, September 14, 2006 01:23:05 PM -0400 Ken Hornstein
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...which is a "risk" almost any filesystem or application takes into
consideration, and allows the filesystem user to determine when it's
"really necessary" to wait to go forward until data is committed to
firm storage, or not. Good or bad, the fileserver is assuming that's
what you want to do all of the time in the CopyOnWrite and
StoreData_RXStyle
So, when I look at StoreData_RXStyle, I am not able to convince myself
that the actual file data is fsync()'d ... unless fsync() is actually
called on the client (and from what I see, fsync() IS passed from the
client to the server). I can believe there is some other fsync()s in
there, certainly, but I don't think it's doing the bulk data (but hey,
I've been wrong before when it comes to AFS program flow).
Huh? There's no RPC for that. And no, I don't think file data is synced,
but metadata is, which is consistent with the behavior of many other
filesystems.
If people are interested in speeding up operations like cloning and volume
moves, I would agree that there's no reason the _volserver_ needs to be
doing any syncing in the middle of those operations, since their
granularity is whole-volume by definition.
-- Jeff
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
