On 21 February 2018 at 17:11, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 08:51:15AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> IOWs, if the filesystem is designed with strictly ordered metadata,
>> then fsync()ing a new file also implies that all references to the
>> new file are
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 08:51:15AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> IOWs, if the filesystem is designed with strictly ordered metadata,
> then fsync()ing a new file also implies that all references to the
> new file are also on stable storage because they happened before the
> fsync on the file was
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 09:53:59PM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On 20 February 2018 at 20:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:22:01AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> >> When fsyncing a new file, also fsync the directory the files is in,
> >>
On 20 February 2018 at 20:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:22:01AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>> When fsyncing a new file, also fsync the directory the files is in,
>> recursively. This is how Linux filesystems should behave nowadays,
>> even
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 12:22:01AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> When fsyncing a new file, also fsync the directory the files is in,
> recursively. This is how Linux filesystems should behave nowadays,
> even if not mandated by POSIX.
I think that is bullshit. Maybe it is what google
Hi Andreas,
- Original Message -
| When fsyncing a new file, also fsync the directory the files is in,
| recursively. This is how Linux filesystems should behave nowadays,
| even if not mandated by POSIX.
|
| Based on ext4 commits 14ece1028, d59729f4e, and 9f713878f.
|
| Fixes xfstests