similar to: fsync in ext3: A question

Hi, I have a doubt in the ordering of writes in ext3. Any help is appreciated. Ext3 enforces certain ordering in writes to ensure data integrity. For example, the journal writes are issued first and only after their successful completion the actual writes are issued. Sometimes we need to maintain ordering across transactions also. This is needed because if the actual writes of one transaction

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, I have a doubt on how the transaction semantics work in ext3. When I copy a file, does the entire copy is treated as one transaction so that finally I have either the full file or no file. Or will it be split into multiple transactions which can result in copying partial files. thanks, Vijayan

Hi, I'm using linux 2.4.25 and I'm trying to change the wakeup interval of kupdate daemon. Is there a way to change that ? I once used 'update' tool for that. But that is not there in 2.4.25. Has it been removed ? I appreciate any help regarding this. thanks, Vijayan

Hi, Is it possible to use a separate journal device (one on a separate drive or a partition) shared among more than 1 Ext3 file systems ? I appreciate any inputs. thanks, Vijayan

Hi, Is there any way that one can change the location of the journal file when the file system is created ? For eg., instead of using inode# 7 and the blocks at the beginning of the file system, I'd like to use an inode at a different cylinder group and some other set of blocks. Even if I'm allowed only to use one of the reserved inodes, is it possible to put the journal file somewhere in

I'm running Linux travis 2.6.15-1-686 #2 Mon Mar 6 15:27:08 UTC 2006 i686 GNU/Linux on a laptop with ext3 on / Some time ago things started getting weird in the following way: I do a fairly normal hack, ^Z, make, test loop when developing and it seems that vim is calling fsync or sync and that is then flushing everything to disk. My tests create maybe 10 dozen files in ~30MB and for some

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 > >> > >> >

Hi, Are SQLite users that are worried about losing data that has been committed (fsynced) better off setting data=journal than data=ordered (or even data=writeback)? The context is trying to reduce the number of writes to a flash file-system without sacrificing data integrity in the event of a power failure or OS crash. Thanks, Dan Kennedy.

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

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

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.

On 2013-06-02, at 23:33, "Arul Selvan" <Rarul at novell.com> wrote: > Greetings. I am Arul Selvan works for Novell. I am exploring the Ext4 architecture, more specifically i would like to understand the write ordering, basically the same blocks is modified more than once, how the write is ordered. Could you point me the doc or the specific source file to look. Writes in memory

thanks that answered my question. One more question, is it possible to stop the delayed block allocation in ext4 ? >>> Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> 6/3/2013 8:17 PM >>> On 2013-06-02, at 23:33, "Arul Selvan" <Rarul@novell.com> wrote: > Greetings. I am Arul Selvan works for Novell. I am exploring the Ext4 architecture, more specifically i would like

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

I have been trying to figure out whether I can enable write caching on my PATA hard drives (WD3200JB) and have fsync not return until data is safely on the platters. I am also running software raid. This is currently on FC5 (though soon to be FC6) with a 2.6.18 kernel. >From snippets I have found on the net, it looks like write barriers are pushed down through software raid when using raid 1.

Hi, can someone tell me whether applications can expect the write requests they make to be executed in order? For instance, suppose an application requests that a file be deleted, and then that another file be moved to an unrelated place. Will these events always happen in that order? Or to put it another way, if something unexpected happens in the meantime (say the computer crashes), is it

If I want to make sure a file has really been deleted do I have to: 1. fsync the file 2. fsync the directory the file is in 3. both? Much thanks. -- Ben Escoto

My application always needs to sync file data after writing. I don't want anything handing around in the kernel buffers. I am wondering what is the best method to accomplish this. 1. Do I use EXT2 and use fdatasync() or fsync()? 2. Do I use EXT2 and mount with the "sync" option? 3. Do I use EXT2 and use the O_DIRECT flag on open()? 4. Do I use EXT3 in full journaled mode,

------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/ext3/fsync.c:50! invalid operand: 0000 [#1] CPU: 0 EIP: 0060:[<b0187d38>] Not tainted VLI EFLAGS: 00010296 (2.6.13.1) EIP is at ext3_sync_file+0x58/0xf0 eax: 00000068 ebx: bf4a479c ecx: b03cffac edx: b03cffac esi: b0398cfc edi: b2b8f1c8 ebp: c13bcf60 esp: c13bcf18 ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068 Process aptitude