David Masover writes:
[...]
>
> What we want is to have programs that can write small changes to one
> file or to many files, lump all those changes into a transaction, and
> have the transaction either succeed or fail.
No existing file system guarantees such behavior. Even atomicity of
single system call is not guaranteed.
>
> > it doesn't stop the system dead in its tracks waiting for some very long
> > transaction to finish?
>
> We've also discussed this. For one thing, if we can have transactions
> in databases which don't stop the database dead in its tracks, why can't
> we do it with filesystems?
Because to have such transactions databases pay huge price in both
resource consumption and available concurrency (isolation, commit-time
locks, etc.), and yet mechanism they use to deal with stuck transactions
(which is simply to abort it) is not very suitable for the file system.
>
> But anyway, if you really want to know, ask someone else or read the
> archives. I wasn't really paying attention except to remember that this
> issue was resolved.
That would be real breakthrough.
[...]
>
> >> fibretions, etc,
> >
> >
> > ???
>
> Low-level tweaking. I think the word is from some sort of calculus.
Fibration. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=108032604606183&w=2
Nikita.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
