[Tux3] Design note: Data flush and rename ordering

[OGAWA Hirofumi]

Daniel Phillips <phillips at phunq.net> writes:

> If Ext3 is the problem, then this is highly topical for us.  We hope
> to implement a largely non-blocking commit model for Tux3 and have
> discussed the strategy for doing this.  I expect we will run into some
> surprises when we actually start running with atomic commit, and shortly
> after, start working on the layered cache model.  Also, our initial
> fsync will just be a sync, roughly speaking, which is sure to cause
> latency problems, so we will need a finer grained model there.

Yes, it's like sync. In my understanding although, fsync() of ext3 tries
to flush the transaction for the inode, it will flushes all transactions
until that transaction. And data=ordered will try to flush datas before
related metadata transactions. So, after all, fsync() will flushes many
datas unrelated to that fsync().

Thanks.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi at mail.parknet.co.jp>

_______________________________________________
Tux3 mailing list
Tux3 at tux3.org
http://mailman.tux3.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tux3