Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965695AbXAZPzW (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:55:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965692AbXAZPzW (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:55:22 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:46981 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965695AbXAZPzU (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:55:20 -0500 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Bill Davidsen Subject: Re: O_DIRECT question Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:53:43 -0500 Message-ID: <45BA2407.1000003@tmr.com> References: <6d6a94c50701101857v2af1e097xde69e592135e54ae@mail.gmail.com> <200701210005.36274.vda.linux@googlemail.com> <45B3580F.7040407@tls.msk.ru> <200701212102.43028.vda.linux@googlemail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org Cc: Linus Torvalds , Viktor , Aubrey , Hua Zhong , Hugh Dickins , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, kenneth.w.chen@intel.com, akpm@osdl.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: mail.tmr.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 In-Reply-To: <200701212102.43028.vda.linux@googlemail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1652 Lines: 31 Denis Vlasenko wrote: > Well, I too currently work with Oracle. > Apparently people who wrote damn thing have very, eh, Oracle-centric > world-view. "We want direct writes to the disk. Period." Why? Does it > makes sense? Are there better ways? - nothing. They think they know better. > I fear you are taking the Windows approach, that the computer is there to serve the o/s and applications have to do things the way the o/s wants. As opposed to the UNIX way, where you can either be clever or stupid, the o/s is there to allow you to use the hardware, not be your mother. Currently applications have the option of letting the o/s make decisions via open/read/write, or let the o/s make decisions and tell the application via aio, or using O_DIRECT and having full control over the process. And that's exactly as it should be. It's not up to the o/s to be mother. > (And let's not even start on why oracle ignores SIGTERM. Apparently Unix > rules aren't for them. They're too big to play by rules.) Any process can ignore SIGTERM, or do a significant amount of cleanup before exit()ing. Complex operations need to be completed or unwound. Why select Oracle? Other applications may also do that, with more or less valid reasons. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot - 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/