EXT2 vs. EXT3: mount w/sync or fdatasync

[brian stone <skye0507@xxxxxxxxx>]

My application always needs to sync file data after writing. I don't want anything handing around in the kernel buffers. I am wondering what is the best method to accomplish this.
 
 1. Do I use EXT2 and use fdatasync() or fsync()?
 
 2. Do I use EXT2 and mount with the "sync" option?
 
 3. Do I use EXT2 and use the O_DIRECT flag on open()?
 
 4. Do I use EXT3 in full journaled mode, where the data and metadata are journaled? In this case, is the journaled data sync'd or async'd? When the journal commits the data to the file system, is that sync'd or dumped into kernel buffers?
 
 5. Since I will always be syncing the data, does it make any sense to use EXT3? It feels like the EXT3 journal would be unnecessary.
 
 Thanks in advance

---

The fish are biting.
 Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
_______________________________________________
Ext3-users mailing list
Ext3-users@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users