Message135870
> and if they do they thus really strive for data integrity, so call
> fsync() as a fallback for the security which Apple provides.
Why?
If I ask a full sync and it fails, I'd rather have an error returned so that I can take the appropriate decision (abort, roll-back, try a standard fsync) rather than have Python silently replace it by an fsync.
> Also: we cannot let os.fsync() fail with ENOTTY!?
Why not, since that's what the kernel returns?
Once again, since the default behaviour doesn't change, this won't break any existing application. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2011-05-12 21:40:30 | neologix | set | recipients:
+ neologix, ronaldoussoren, pitrou, vstinner, nadeem.vawda, santoso.wijaya, sdaoden |
2011-05-12 21:40:30 | neologix | set | messageid: <1305236430.65.0.742599323555.issue11877@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2011-05-12 21:40:30 | neologix | link | issue11877 messages |
2011-05-12 21:40:30 | neologix | create | |
|