This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author sdaoden
Recipients nadeem.vawda, neologix, pitrou, ronaldoussoren, santoso.wijaya, sdaoden, vstinner
Date 2011-04-21.20:27:08
SpamBayes Score 5.415243e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <20110421202659.GA82546@sherwood.local>
In-reply-to <1303411987.24.0.672069847024.issue11877@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
Charles-Francois Natali wrote:
> I'm -10 on sync_file_range on Linux:
> [...] last time I checked [...]

I just looked at
    http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=fs/sync.c;h=c38ec163da6ccba00a0146c75606c1b548b31343;hb=HEAD
and it seems - as far as i understand what i read - that you're
still right; and, furthermore, that fsync() does everything
anyway.  (But here an idiot is talking about *very* complicated
stuff.)

I've also "search"ed for the called filemap_write_and_wait_range()
and found the commit message for
2daea67e966dc0c42067ebea015ddac6834cef88 as part of that;
very interesting in respect to our issue here.

I will wait before i update the patch though, just in case some
experienced NetBSD or AIX user posts some message.  For OpenBSD
i think i can confirm that fsync(2) alone is enough after taking
a (shallow, all shallow) look into kernel/vfs_syscalls.c and
ufs/ffs/{ffs_softdep.c,softdep.h}.
History
Date User Action Args
2011-04-21 20:27:09sdaodensetrecipients: + sdaoden, ronaldoussoren, pitrou, vstinner, nadeem.vawda, neologix, santoso.wijaya
2011-04-21 20:27:08sdaodenlinkissue11877 messages
2011-04-21 20:27:08sdaodencreate