From: Wesley M. <mo...@ch...> - 2006-04-02 23:20:38
|
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Ethan Blanton wrote: > This does not exactly follow. We save it because something has > changed. If every application called fsync() every time something > changed, you would not be pleased at all with your system performance. > > Mark is right that this is a problem with the instability of your > system, and not with Gaim. Yes, someone *does* need to test unstable > device drivers -- but to test them on a system where you care about > your data is not wise. Note that, on an unstable system, even fsync > cannot save you because most modern disk drives have quite large write > caches, and fsync does not disable the drive cache. In fact, I'm not > even sure that a non-root user can force such a write, although it may > be so. > > If Gaim is saving *spuriously*, we need to fix this. If it is not > (i.e., important changes are actually being made), I think our current > behavior is a good compromise for getting changes on disk during > non-pathological conditions without incurring lots of delays. This is > what disk buffers are _for_. fsync() runs the very real possibility > of incurring noticable UI delays (particularly over network > filesystems), which we would like to avoid. You guys do whatever you like with the suggestion. I'll be keeping a backup copy of my configuration files so I don't have to worry about it. -- This .signature sanitized for your protection |