search for: fsyncs

Btrfs had some issues with fsync()''ing directories and fsync()''ing after renames. These three new tests cover the 3 different issues we were seeing. This breaks out the dmflakey stuff into a common helper to be shared between generic/311 and generic/321. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> --- V1->V2: rename test to generic/321 -removed an

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > How about 'strace mkfs.ext2 ..' and see if any system calls are > returning errors. That would show you whether nbd-client is throwing > errors away, or whether mkfs is getting the errors and ignoring them > (seems pretty unlikely, but you never know). > > After that, it'd be down

Hello, We found that fsync and fdatasync syscalls sometimes don't sync data in an ext3 file system under the following conditions. 1. Kernel version is 2.6.6 or later (including 2.6.8.1 and 2.6.9-rc2). 2. Ext3's journalling mode is "data=journal". 3. Create a file (whose size is 1Mbytes) and execute umount/mount. 4. lseek to a random position within the file, write 8192 bytes

Hi all, I'm using dovecot since a few months and it works great. But a few days ago some coworkers mentioned that they got errormessages in their Mailapp. I searched in the logfiles and found this: Sep 14 12:07:35 Mailserv dovecot: IMAP(eckhard-ma-domain-com): fsync(/home/eckhard-ma-domain-com/mails/.INBOX.0002-Druckangebote von Druckereien.0002-schmerk

Linux kernel (as of 2.6.15.4) has the following performance bug: Syncing (fsync() or fdatasync()) files with zero links (deleted files) in not no-op, as it should be. See details, a test C program, and the rationale in the URL below: http://b2e.ex-code.com/index.php/soft/2006/02/24/linux_performance_bug_zero_links_fsync In the article with the URL above it is also explained how to make much

Btrfs had some issues with fsync()''ing directories and fsync()''ing after renames. These three new tests cover the 3 different issues we were seeing. This breaks out the dmflakey stuff into a common helper to be shared between generic/311 and generic/320. Thanks, Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com> --- V1->V2: moved this out into its own test instead of

Hi, I have a question on fsync() and ext3's journaling modes. Assume that I call fsync(fd) on a file. If that file is in 'data=journal' mode, would the fsync() return once the data gets safely into the journal ? On the other hand, if that file is in 'data=writeback' mode, would the fsync() return only when the data gets safely into its actual location ? Any help is

Hi all, We are building a new system which is going to use ext3 FS. We would like to know more about the behavior of ext3 in the case of failure. But before I procede, I would like to share more information about our future system. * Our application always does an fsync on files * When symbolic links (more specifically fast symlink) are created, the host directory is also fsync'ed. * Our

In order to improve the performance of fsync, we use the outstanding ordered extents to avoid looking up the checksum from the csum tree. But we didn''t filter out the ordered extents whose csum is still being calculated, when we got those ordered extents, we had to wait for the csum calculation. It made the performance dropped down suddenly. (On my box, it drop down from 56MB/s to

...an fsync(fd) is -AFAIK- mostly equivalent with a sync(pool on which fd is). sync() of course is system wide, so if you have other file systems, those will be synced as well. (this setting isn't for everybody) 2. in a multiprocess environment this would need coordination, so instead of doing fsyncs in distinct processes, there would be one process needed, which does the sync and returns OK for the others, so they can notify the client about the commit to the stable storage. Any opinions on this?

Hi all, Recently there''s been discussion [1] in the Linux community about how filesystems should deal with rename(2), particularly in the case of a crash. ext4 was found to truncate files after a crash, that had been written with open("foo.tmp"), write(), close() and then rename("foo.tmp", "foo"). This is because ext4 uses delayed allocation and may not

Hi! Afair, fsync()ing a directory is subject to platform-specific and implementation-defined behaviour, and may either - work as you'd want and (probably) expect - fail with an error - fail silently at least if your application targets more than one operating system/kernel - and even on one and the same platform, different filesystems might exhibit sublty different patterns of behaviour.

Hi, tl;dr summary of below: flock() works, but what does it take to make sync()/fsync() work in a 3 node GFS cluster? I am under the impression that POSIX flock, POSIX fcntl(F_SETLK/F_GETLK,...), and POSIX read/write/sync/fsync are all supported in cluster operations, such that in theory, SQLite3 should be able to atomically lock the file (or a subset of page), modify pages, flush the pages to

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 8:21 PM, Paul Anderson <pha at umich.edu> wrote: > Hi, > > tl;dr summary of below: flock() works, but what does it take to make > sync()/fsync() work in a 3 node GFS cluster? > > I am under the impression that POSIX flock, POSIX > fcntl(F_SETLK/F_GETLK,...), and POSIX read/write/sync/fsync are all > supported in cluster operations, such that in

Hi group: I need some help! I use samba 4.5.8 And I mount a samba directory from CentOS 7. When I run such program in the mounted directory: ``` #include <stdlib.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <errno.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <string.h> int main() { printf("open aaa\n"); int fd = open("aaa", O_RDONLY |

Raghavendra, Thanks very much for your reply. I fixed our data corruption problem by disabling the volume performance.write-behind flag as you suggested, and simultaneously disabling caching in my client side mount command. In very modest testing, the flock() case appears to me to work well - before it would corrupt the db within a few transactions. Testing using built in sqlite3 locks is

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 18:03:00 +0300, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote: > On 04/09/2010 05:56 PM, Ben Gamari wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:08:58 +0200, Andi Kleen<andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: > > > >> Ben Gamari<bgamari.foss@gmail.com> writes: > >> ext4/XFS/JFS/btrfs should be better in this regard > >> > >> >

+Csaba. On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:52 AM, Paul Anderson <pha at umich.edu> wrote: > Raghavendra, > > Thanks very much for your reply. > > I fixed our data corruption problem by disabling the volume > performance.write-behind flag as you suggested, and simultaneously > disabling caching in my client side mount command. > Good to know it worked. Can you give us the

It wouldn''t be proper to start my first post here without congratulations and thanks to the ZFS team for such an impressive piece of work. Anyway, on to my query. I''ve been trying out ZFS, with a particular focus in reducing latency in a specific application. This application has a fair amount of random writing going on in the background (which, of course, ZFS will make

Libvirt has a fixed 15 second timeout for qemu to exit. If qemu is writing to a slow USB key, it can hang (in D state) for much longer than this - many minutes usually. To work around this, fsync the output file before closing the libvirt connection so that qemu shouldn't have anything (much) to write. We have to do this in a few places in the code. This is a hack - it would be better to