From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri May 31 17:44:07 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA26977 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 31 May 1996 17:44:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA26972 for ; Fri, 31 May 1996 17:44:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id KAA26374; Sat, 1 Jun 1996 10:37:11 +1000 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 10:37:11 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199606010037.KAA26374@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, terry@lambert.org Subject: Re: Breaking ffs - speed enhancement? Cc: davidg@Root.COM, hackers@freebsd.org, jgreco@solaria.sol.net, rashid@rk.ios.com Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> >There is a school of thought that says "shall be updated" in POSIX is >> >not the same as "shall be committed to stable storage" (the traditional >> >BSD implementation). >> >> When was this traditional? >It's just historical behaviour; has to do (in 4.3) with whether or >not O_ASYNC is set or not. The write is done, regardless; it *will* This seems unlikely. O_ASYNC has to do with SIGIO for sockets. Perhaps you mean O_FSYNC. O_FSYNC is a no-op in 4.4Lite and in FreeBSD. Perhaps you mean MNT_ASYNC. MNT_ASYNC is (almost?) a no-op in 4.4Lite but is partly implemented in FreeBSD. Bruce