Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 14:17:39 -0800 From: Jack Rusher <jar@integratus.com> To: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@monzoon.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: soft updates and qmail (RE: qmail IO problems) Message-ID: <3A807803.27999266@integratus.com> References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102061822240.1535-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> <3A805E94.8FF4F103@monzoon.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andre Oppermann wrote: > > > Since when does `atomic' equal `synchronous' ? > > Because otherwise it would not be atomically, would it? I am loath to add to this bloated thread, but... atomic and durable aren't the same thing. This is why A.C.I.D. semantics contain both A & D. The atomicity guarantee concerning rename is meant to suggest that there be no time when the filesystem view contains either both links or no link to the file you are renaming. The operation will either succeed or fail as an atomic unit with regard to the system's view of the filesystem. This DOES NOT mean that the data will be on stable store. -- Jack Rusher, Senior Engineer | mailto:jar@integratus.com Integratus, Inc. | http://www.integratus.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A807803.27999266>