From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jun 25 11:39:58 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA27298 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA27292 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:39:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA00282; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:38:42 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199606251838.LAA00282@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: int link(const int inode, const char *name2) To: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:38:42 -0700 (MST) Cc: jonny@gaia.coppe.ufrj.br, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "T. William Wells" at Jun 25, 96 00:50:15 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > sync;sync;sync > > That bit of ancient history is purely psychological. Since sync > isn't synchronous, after the command returns, your buffers aren't > all written. However, after you've typed the command twice again, > odds are they are. :-) Actually, 3 sync's is superstition. Two syncs was a trigger for a cache flush on a number of older UNIX and UNIX-like systems. The second sync would wait, since the kernel knew that there was a sync pending. One could argue on an old (but active) system, you'd type sync until it hung for a bit. Maybe the first one was preterbed by loading the sync code itself? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.