Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Probably the first step towards this goal would be to look at how to have cp, > mv, etc all take advantage of copying to a temporary file that would be > synchronised with fsync() before being renamed. Also it would be good to > have an option to call fsync() before close(). Sometimes you merely want to > know that the data is committed to disk before the program returns.
These both sound like nice additions, but I'd guess the fsync option should be independent from the tempfile+rename option. The original request was only about tempfile+rename. My vague impression is that fsync will make things run considerably slower on many implementations, and it won't help the original requester at all. tempfile+rename fixes the problem that the original request was about. Probably part of the confusion here is due to the choice of the name "--atomic" to mean tempfile+rename; in some sense rename is atomic, but it's not the same sense that fsync is. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
