Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 07:44:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 07:43:56 -0500 Received: from [212.17.18.2] ([212.17.18.2]:27403 "EHLO technoart.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 07:43:44 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Denis Perchine To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: fsync vs fdatasync on Linux Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 18:41:59 +0600 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] In-Reply-To: <01021818225902.00766@dyp.perchine.com> In-Reply-To: <01021818225902.00766@dyp.perchine.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01021818415903.00766@dyp.perchine.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 18 February 2001 18:22, Denis Perchine wrote: > Hello, > > as fas as I can see from fdatasync man page, and from the latest kernel > sources (2.4.1ac3, fs/buffer.c), they are equivalent. > > Using of fdatasync in database can gain significant gain on systems which > supports it (on HP it gains up to 25% with pg_bench on PostgreSQL 7.1b5). > > Are there any plans to implement this correctly? And due to what problems > it was not implemented yet? Forget this crap. Seems I missed these lines: err = file->f_op->fsync(file, dentry, 0); err = file->f_op->fsync(file, dentry, 1); -- Sincerely Yours, Denis Perchine ---------------------------------- E-Mail: dyp@perchine.com HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/ FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5 ---------------------------------- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/