From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 26 18:51:11 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E2C1065675 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:51:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 301148FC2A for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:51:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD52F3255854 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:33:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 89532-03 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:33:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1002) id B1E113253B12; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:33:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE373252F65 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:33:52 -0300 (ADT) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:33:52 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Subject: fsync: Linux vs FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:51:11 -0000 Someone recently posted on one of the PostgreSQL Blogs concerning fsync on Linux/Windows/Mac OS X, but failed to make any comments on any of the BSDs ... the post has to do with how fsync works on the various OSs, and am curious as to whether or not this is something that also afflicts us: http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2010/10/wal-reliability.html >From reading our man page, I see no warnings similar to what the other OSs have, specifically: Mac OS X: For applications that require tighter guarantees about the integrity of their data, Mac OS X provides the F_FULLFSYNC fcntl Linux: If the underlying hard disk has write caching enabled, then the data may not really be on permanent storage when fsync() / fdatasync() return. So, do we hide the fact, or are, in fact, not afflicted by this? Thanks ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org