lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <94a0d4530903271327w48a649e8h965a22c2a9b57b4d@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:27:23 +0200
From:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Rees <drees76@...il.com>, Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>> > So the fact is, "people should always use fsync" simply isn't a realistic
>> > expectation, nor is it historically accurate.
>>
>> Far too many people don't - and it is unfortunate but people should learn
>> to write quality software.
>
> You're ignoring reality.
>
> Your definition of "quality software" is PURE SH*T.
>
> Look at that laptop disk spinup issue. Look at the performance issue. Look
> at something as nebulous as "usability".
>
> If adding fsync's makes software unusable (and it does), then you
> shouldn't call that "quality software".
>
> Alan, just please face that reality, and think about it for a moment. If
> fsync() was instantaneous, this discussion wouldn't exist. But read the
> thread. We're talking 3-5s under NORMAL load, with peaks of minutes.

We are looking at the wrong problem, the problem is not "should
userspace apps do fsync", the problem is "how do we ensure reliable
data where it's needed".

It would be great if as a user I could have the option to set an fsync
level and say; look, I have a fast fs, and I really care about data
reliability in this server, so, level=0; or, hmm, what is this data
reliability thing? I just want my phone to don't be so damn slow,
level=5.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ