[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20071115195321.2b802bc0.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 19:53:21 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: wcheng@...hat.com
Cc: Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@....ntt.co.jp>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext3,4:fdatasync should skip metadata writeout
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 22:47:40 -0500 Wendy Cheng <wcheng@...hat.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:47:27 +0900 Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Currently fdatasync is identical to fsync in ext3,4.
> >>I think fdatasync should skip journal flush in data=ordered and data=writeback mode
> >>because this syscall is not required to synchronize the metadata.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I suppose so. Although one wonders what earthly point there is in syncing
> >a file's data if we haven't yet written out the metadata which is required
> >for locating that data.
> >
> >IOW, fdatasync() is only useful if the application knows that it is overwriting
> >already-instantiated blocks.
> >
> >In which case it might as well have used fsync(). For ext2-style filesystems,
> >anyway.
> >
> >hm. It needs some thought.
> >
> >
> >
>
> There are non-trivial amount of performance critical programs,
> particularly in financial application segment ported from legacy UNIX
> platforms, know the difference between fsync() and fdatasync(). Those
> can certainly take advantages of this separation. Don't underestimate
> the talents of these application programmers.
>
If they're that good, they'll be using sync_file_range() ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists