Oliver Jowett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So Linux is indeed doing a cache flush on fsync
Actually I think the root of the problem was precisely that Linux does not issue any sort of cache flush commands to drives on fsync. There was some talk on linux-kernel of what how they could take advantage of new ATA features planned on new SATA drives coming out now to solve this. But they didn't seem to think it was urgent or worth the performance hit of doing a complete cache flush.
Oh, ok. I haven't really kept up to date with it; I just run with write-cache disabled on my IDE drives as a matter of course.
I did see this: http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0304.1/0471.html
which implies you're never going to get an implementation that is safe across all IDE hardware :(
-O
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
