On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:15 PM, Calvin Walton <calvin.walton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hmm. Iâm doing a little interpretation of what Olaf said here; but I > think you may have misunderstood the question? > > He doesnât care about whether or not the file is securely written to > disk (durable); however he doesnât want to see any partially written > files. In other words, something like > > Â Â 1. Write to temp file > Â Â 2. Rename temp file over original file Meta data, including file owner, should be preserved. Ideally, no temp files should be visible either. > Where the rename is only committed to disk once the entire contents of > the file have been written securely â whenever that may eventually > happen. > > He doesnât want to synchronously wait for the file to be written, > because the new data isnât particularly important. The only important > thing is that the file either contains the old or new data after a > filesystem crash; not incomplete data. So, itâs more of an ordering > problem, I think? (Analogous to putting some sort of barrier between the > file write/close and the file rename to maintain ordering.) > > Hopefully Iâve interpreted the original question correctly, because this > is something I would find interesting as well. Yes, you did. Olaf -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
