Re: fsync vs open_sync

> There is also the fact that NTFS is a very slow filesystem, and
> Linux is
> a lot better than Windows for everything disk, caching and IO related. Try
> to copy some files in NTFS and in ReiserFS...

I'm not so sure I would agree with such a blanket generalization. I find NTFS to be very fast, my main complaint is fragmentation issues...I bet NTFS is better than ext3 at most things (I do agree with you about the cache, thoughO.

I think in very general sense the open source stuff is higher quality but Microsoft benefits from a very tight vertical integration of the system. They added ReadFileScatter and WriteFileScatter to the win32 api specifically to make SQL Server run faster and SQL server is indeed very, very good at i/o.

SQL Server keeps a one file database with blocks collected and written asynchronously. It's a very tight system because they have control over every layer of the system.

Know your enemy.

That said, I think transaction based file I/O is 'the way' and if implemented on Reiser4 faster than I/O methodology than offered on windows/ntfs.

Merlin