From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142A41F8C6 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 05:57:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238543AbhHZF6J (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 01:58:09 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:58115 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230313AbhHZF6J (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 01:58:09 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 0D8056736F; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 07:57:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 07:57:19 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=C6var_Arnfj=F6r=F0?= Bjarmason Cc: Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Neeraj-Personal , Johannes Schindelin , Jeff King , Jeff Hostetler , Christoph Hellwig , Neeraj Singh Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] core.fsyncobjectfiles: batch disk flushes Message-ID: <20210826055719.GB17560@lst.de> References: <87mtp5cwpn.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87mtp5cwpn.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 06:11:13PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > 3) Re some of the musings about fsync() recently in > https://lore.kernel.org/git/877dhs20x3.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/; is this > method of doing not-quite-an-fsync guaranteed by some OS's / POSIX etc, > or is it more like the initial approach before core.fsyncObjectFiles, > i.e. the happy-go-lucky approach described in the "[...]that orders data > writes properly[...]" documentation you're removing. Except for the now removed ext3 filesystem in Linux that basically turned every fsync into syncfs, that is a file system-wide sync I've never heard about such behavior for data writeback. Many file systems will sometimes or always behave like that for metadata writeback, but there is no guarantees you could rely on for that.