[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <72dbd3150904031557q33c5f29cr3b767131dcc2f51@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 15:57:03 -0700
From: David Rees <drees76@...il.com>
To: Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>,
Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, tytso@....edu,
jesper@...gh.cc,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 05:57:05PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Just curious, does MythTV need fsync(), or merely to tell the kernel to
>> begin asynchronously writing data to storage?
>
> quoting the TheadedFileWriter comments
>
> /*
> * NOTE: This doesn't even try flush our queue of data.
> * This only ensures that data which has already been sent
> * to the kernel for this file is written to disk. This
> * means that if this backend is writing the data over a
> * network filesystem like NFS, then the data will be visible
> * to the NFS server after this is called. It is also useful
> * in preventing the kernel from buffering up so many writes
> * that they steal the CPU for a long time when the write
> * to disk actually occurs.
> */
There is no need to fsync data on a NFS mount in Linux anymore. All
NFS mounts are mounted sync by default now unless you explicitly
specify otherwise (and then you should then know what you're getting
in to).
-Dave
--
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