On Mar 27, 2013, at 22:19 , Chaskiel Grundman wrote: > It seems that openafs 1.6.3 will remove the ihandle sync background > thread that was put in when foreground syncs were removed many years back.
That's the current plan, yes. It's not an easy decision, so thanks for your input. [...] > Just because ext3 (in ordered mode) does something doesn't mean > it's correct or something you should count on. If you don't > fsync/fdatasync, there is no guarantee your data is on the media or ever > will be on the media. In theory, that's correct. But is there a real case where data is not flushed by the OS at intervals comparable to those of the current background sync? > I understand the current use of the ihandle cache for this is problematic, > but that is not an excuse to never sync. To my understanding, ripping out the current implementation of background syncs may cause somewhat more damage to files written to during the last O(10s) before in the case of a server crash - it's not prevented completely either way. But, again to my understanding, leaving it in bears the potential of silently damaging your data on loaded servers. Given that fixing the syncing behaviour isn't feasible, especially anytime soon, what's the right thing to do? > I will be sad if I have to patch foreground syncs back into my > fileservers, but I will if I have to. It seems you're not considering patching the background syncs back in? > P.S. I am aware that ih_reallyclose() calls OS_SYNC(), but it's not very > useful. > ih_reallyclose() is not called under normal circumstances except when > deleting files or detaching volumes (on DAFS or shutdown) _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
