https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/318
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e78150f2c175abea4c8c4b#commitcomment-24120847
BTW, see also https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/pull/1049
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e78150f2c175abea4c8c4b#commitcomment-24120807
rpm-ostree also has its own `syncfs()` calls and we definitely don't want
librpm doing it.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e78150f2c175a
See issue #258 for faster (and better: includes cache invalidation) than
sync(2).
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e78150f2c175abea4c8c4b
AFAIK, Docker is dumb and passes everything through to the host filesystem to
handle. So, yes...
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e78150f
But... a sync() from within a container does sync() on the entire host? Really?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e78150f2c175abea4c8c4b#co
The problem with opt-in is that exactly nobody is going to configure it so it's
as good as useless.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f322cbe428e781
It wouldn't, because RPM within docker doesn't know where it runs. So I would
rather for opt-in for this feature
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f
Disabling the sync automatically on chroot installations would be fine by me.
Would that cover the dockerd case?
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/b7a869f0f
Eek, that's horrible. Please add a way (macro) to disable this.
Calling sync() hurts very much for big servers with huge disks and a big buffer
cache. I get that's it's somewhat acceptable for software installation on the
server (syncfs would still be much nicer so that data partitions don't get
10 matches
Mail list logo
