On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 12:24:50PM -0500, Phillip Susi wrote: > A while back I noticed lines in my syslog indicating that a FLUSH CACHE > command timed out and the drive was hard reset to recover. That made me > wonder if such a thing makes any sense as a valid EH strategy. Any > previous writes that returned successfully but are still sitting in the > drive's write cache will be silently invalidated by resetting the drive > won't they? Then the FLUSH CACHE command is retried, and of course, > succeeds because it is now a NOOP. Then fsync() returns and postfix > thinks my new email has been committed to the disk, when in fact, it has > not. > > Am I mistaken somewhere or is the kernel really doing the wrong thing > here? If the device drops the content of the volatile write on a reset we'll have much problems than that..
