From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] introduce sys_syncfs to sync a single file system Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:08:22 +0100 Message-ID: <201103102308.23006.arnd@arndb.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.9]:59107 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751606Ab1CJWIf (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:08:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Aneesh Kumar K. V" , Jonathan Nieder , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, mtk.manpages@gmail.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hch@lst.de, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 10 March 2011 20:31:30 Sage Weil wrote: > It is frequently useful to sync a single file system, instead of all > mounted file systems via sync(2): > > - On machines with many mounts, it is not at all uncommon for some of > them to hang (e.g. unresponsive NFS server). sync(2) will get stuck on > those and may never get to the one you do care about (e.g., /). > - Some applications write lots of data to the file system and then > want to make sure it is flushed to disk. Calling fsync(2) on each > file introduces unnecessary ordering constraints that result in a large > amount of sub-optimal writeback/flush/commit behavior by the file > system. > > ... > Signed-off-by: Sage Weil Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann