Pavel Machek wrote: > fsync() is easy. But some people _want_ to have either newdata _or_ > olddata, but don't care which one, and would prefer to avoid > fsync. That's where replace() should help... Most people, I wager, care more about their code being portable than they do about leaping through a Linux-specific hoop. They're not going to use replace; not ever; that's what link/unlink is for. If you think it's reasonable to modify every instance in applications where a sudden crash would cause data loss, why not make a mount-time flag that does all of that in FS; and for the other 99% of users, it doesn't, but runs faster? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
