>>> Since we cannot eliminate the non-atomic nature of our metadata >>> updates, and we can't easily tack on a metadata journal, I think there >>> is an argument worth considering that doing batch updates during >>> volume operations actually reduces our risk of data corruption (by >>> reducing the total number of physical writes to media). >> >> That is, I believe a larger project than what other people have been >> talking about (just removing the fsync() calls). Not that I think it's >> a bad idea, mind you :-) > >Hm? I'm pretty sure Tom is proposing suppressing all calls to fsync() >during a volume operation until the operation is complete.
I interpreted Tom's comments about "batch updates" as not wanting to suppress calls to fsync() (well, I imagine that's part of it), but to actually batch up calls to write(). If I'm wrong, then my apologies. I agree that turning off fsync for volume operations should be relatively straightforward. ---Ken _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
