Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux kernel ....)

[cmikk]

On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 23:15:41 -0500 (EST) , Russell Nelson writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>  > What use is syncing the data to disk, if you can't
>  > get to it after a crash?  It might as well have just
>  > stayed in cache otherwise....
> 
> fsync the data if you want the data on disk.
> fsync the directory if you want the metadata on disk.
> 
> What's complicated or difficult about that?

It's not difficult -- just overly complicated, compared
to the standard

 - fsync the file if you want the file on disk

Why require two separate fsync() calls when one
will do?

Further, what is the point if the first fsync() call
is useless without the second, and vice versa?

(If the data is on disk, but the on-disk metadata is
not sufficient to locate it, then the data is, for
all practical purpose, useless.)

-- 
Chris Mikkelson  | Einstein himself said that God doesn't roll dice. But
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | he was wrong.  And in fact, anyone who has played role-
                 | playing games knows that God probably had to roll quite
                 | a few dice to come up with a character like Einstein.
                 |                              -- Larry Wall