Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Isn't this true of any atomic operation in the event of a crash? You'll either see the old data or the new data when the system comes back up.


Yes. But traditionally Unix filesystems provided stronger consistency guarantees than required by POSIX, and applications have come to rely on them. Actually, in the event of a crash I think POSIX specifies implementation-defined behavior even for fsync.


Making fsync a no-op and not having any durability at all is perfectly POSIX compliant. POSIX only concerns itself with the visibility of I/O in the live system (e.g. a process either sees a write fully realized, or not at all - this didn't use to be true for larger writes until fairly recently, btw.). POSIX specifies nothing about what happens when a system is restarted or looses power.


The alternative would not allow for a posix-compliant implementation ramfs.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: