On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Somebody? 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
