From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: From: "Paul Taysom" To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] 9p2k, fsync Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:46:03 -0700 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5e6f07ea-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Tsync: This way there be dragons. The next thing you'll be asking for is byte range locks and then locks that can survive crashes and then something to coordinate updates to multiple files and then away to back it up . . . . . . If you want ACID let's look at away of providing for it within the context of the a simple file protocol. Ideas for sync: 1. Battery backed static RAM for the more resent requests like NetApp. 2. A volume that does write through or flush on close. I agree that databases have gotten way out of hand but is there away within the spirit of Plan 9 to provide ACID? Sync does not meet the requirement. Paul Taysom >>> nemo@gsyc.escet.urjc.es 02/08/01 07:03AM >>> : Hey? No disagreement that it's a fileserver issue, but I should also : be able to ask the file server to sync the data associated with a : particular FID. That's a question I have. I understand it can be done from its console, but is there any way to ask 9pcfs for an inmediate sync through the network? And another one. Any plans to make the future fs kernel do software mirrowing on ide disks?