From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Grissiom <chaos.proton@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] async: Don't call async_synchronize_full_special() while holding sb_lock
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:31:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090112023138.GD6428@shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4966D652.4070105@linux.intel.com>
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > - removing a million files and queuing all of the
> > deletes in the async queues....
>
> the async code throttles at 32k outstanding.
> Yes 32K is arbitrary, but if you delete a million files fast, all but the
> first few thousand are
> synchronous.
Hmm.
If I call unlink() a thousand times and then call fsync() on the
parent directories covering files I've unlinked... I expect the
deletes to be committed to disk when the last fsync() has returned. I
require that a crash and restart will not see the files. Several
kinds of transactional software and even some shell scripts expect this.
Will these asynchronous deletes break the guaranteed
commit-of-the-delete provided by fsync() on the parent directory?
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-12 2:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <a0adeea50901080007q5a3ed5c8y5a744ce37e677325@mail.gmail.com>
2009-01-08 14:37 ` "BUG: scheduling while atomic: pdflush/30/0x00000002" in latest git Dave Kleikamp
2009-01-08 15:21 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-08 15:46 ` [PATCH] async: Don't call async_synchronize_full_special() while holding sb_lock Dave Kleikamp
2009-01-08 22:50 ` Dave Chinner
2009-01-08 22:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-09 0:32 ` Alan Cox
2009-01-09 0:38 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-09 1:40 ` Dave Chinner
2009-01-09 4:45 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-09 8:22 ` Dave Chinner
2009-01-09 15:09 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-12 2:31 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2009-01-12 3:54 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-01-12 7:55 ` Dave Chinner
2009-01-12 7:48 ` Dave Chinner
2009-01-09 12:31 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-01-09 5:18 ` "BUG: scheduling while atomic: pdflush/30/0x00000002" in latest git Grissiom
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090112023138.GD6428@shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chaos.proton@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).