On Tue, 3 Jul 2012, James Litchfield wrote:
Agreed - msync/munmap is the only guarantee.
I don't see that the munmap definition assures that anything is
written to disk. The system is free to buffer the data in RAM as
long as it likes without writing anything at all.
Bob
--
Bob
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jul 2012, James Litchfield wrote:
Agreed - msync/munmap is the only guarantee.
I don't see that the munmap definition assures that anything is written to
disk. The system is free to buffer the data
On 07/04/12 16:47, Nico Williams wrote:
I don't see that the munmap definition assures that anything is written to
disk. The system is free to buffer the data in RAM as long as it likes
without writing anything at all.
Oddly enough the manpages at the Open Group don't make this clear. So
I
I really makes no sense at all to
have munmap(2) not imply msync(3C).
Why not? munmap(2) does basically the equivalent of write(2). In the
case of write, that is: a later read from the same location will see
the written data, unless another write happens in-between. If power
goes down following
On 2012-Jul-05 06:47:36 +1000, Nico Williams n...@cryptonector.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jul 2012, James Litchfield wrote:
Agreed - msync/munmap is the only guarantee.
I don't see that the munmap definition assures
