Re: Linux 2.6.29

Alan Cox
2009-03-27T19:14:50Z

> Agreed, we need a middle ground. We need a transition path that
> recognizes that ext3 won't be the dominant filesystem for Linux in
> perpetuity, and that ext3's data=ordered semantics will someday no
> longer be a major factor in application design. fbarrier() semantics
> might be one approach; there may be others. It's something we need to
> figure out.

Would making close imply fbarrier() rather than fsync() work for this ?
That would give people the ordering they want even if they are less
careful but wouldn't give the media error cases - which are less
interesting.

Alan