| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Null files reloaded :-) |
| From: | Ricardo Correia <wizeman@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:20:59 +0100 |
| Cc: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20040720180625.GA31713@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <200407200444.21761.wizeman@xxxxxxxx> <200407201440.03713.wizeman@xxxxxxxx> <20040720180625.GA31713@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.6.2 |
On Tuesday 20 July 2004 19:06, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > there is no way to recognise this, and there is no old file (it was > unlinked and/or truncated) Hmm.. I don't get it.. Consider your previous scenario: 1 - File A is safe on disk 2 - Process writes file B (metadata on disk, file data in RAM) 3 - Process renames B to A 4 - Periodic disk sync (every 5 seconds or so?) Now if power failure occurs after 3, but before 4.. isn't the inode and content of A still on disk? And isn't the directory still pointing to the inode of A? I thought metadata at this point was only written to the journal. If you could enlighten me, I would be appreciated :) I just think it doesn't make much sense (but what do I know?) :-) |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Null files reloaded :-), Chris Wedgwood |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Null files reloaded :-), Chris Wedgwood |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Null files reloaded :-), Chris Wedgwood |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Null files reloaded :-), Chris Wedgwood |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |