From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: fsync, ext2 on Linux |
Date: | 2004-10-31 15:31:24 |
Message-ID: | 4185054C.9050500@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
>
>
>>The Linux [ext2] fsync man page says:
>>"It does not necessarily ensure that the entry in the directory
>>containing the file has also reached disk. For that an explicit fsync on
>>the file descriptor of the directory is also needed."
>>
>>
>
>This seems so broken as to defy belief. A process creating a file
>doesn't normally *have* a file descriptor for the parent directory,
>and I don't think the concept of an FD for a directory is even
>portable (opendir() certainly doesn't return an FD). One might also
>ask if we are expected to fsync everything up to the root in order
>to be sure that the file remains accessible, and how exactly we should
>do that on directories we don't have write access for.
>
>
The notes say this:
When an ext2 file system is mounted with the sync option,
directory
entries are also implicitly synced by fsync.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-31 15:38:43 | Re: Problems with pgxs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-31 15:15:01 | Re: fsync, ext2 on Linux |