Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 16:03:46 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS DOWN Message-ID: <20070513230346.GD21795@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <464798C2.8030307@fer.hr> References: <20070512153532.GQ21795@elvis.mu.org> <63984.1178992555@critter.freebsd.dk> <f25m78$ik$2@sea.gmane.org> <20070513215442.GZ21795@elvis.mu.org> <46478C9A.9050807@fer.hr> <20070513225031.GC21795@elvis.mu.org> <464798C2.8030307@fer.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> [070513 16:02] wrote: > Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > * Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> [070513 15:12] wrote: > > >> Even if it's forbidden by POSIX or other standards, FreeBSD isn't > >> popular enough to be one of the systems that don't support it. > > > > I don't know about that, for the longest time Linux's "fsync" > > call was async because it was "faster", I'd not like to compete > > on those terms. Worse is not better. > > Of course not, but I dragged out an example where the implementation > could handle a situation, but chose not to (any that only in certain > cases) in the name of standards compliance. I consider this wrong > because the "lenient" behaviour is a superset of required one, and in > any case the choice shouldn't be made based on uid. > > In short, "beware of arbitrary standards' compliance" :) I agree, but I don't see a way to do this without pessimizing malloc/free performance. I should have a look at what glibc does to see how it impacts them. -- - Alfred Perlstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070513230346.GD21795>