From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.grenz-bonn.de ([178.33.37.38]:46022 "EHLO mail.grenz-bonn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751027AbeECOaL (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 May 2018 10:30:11 -0400 Subject: Re: fsync() after close() and re-open -- insights appreciated To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Linux FS-devel Mailing List References: <74319d6c-d429-9ea1-8f6d-ddb16834a796@nh2.me> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Niklas_Hamb=c3=bcchen?= Message-ID: <7cfdb4f4-e99c-9056-ffe0-7c6a7d589d71@nh2.me> Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 16:30:08 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello Amir, thanks a lot for your reply! > Are you asking the question without being aware of all the discussions > that led to this patch https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/23/994 Yes, I was not aware of those. Am I right assuming that what you mention is what Posgres is now referring to as "fsyncgate" (https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Fsync_Errors)? > The short answer is no, the latter provides a better guaranty. > The longer answer is that durability guarantees depends on kernel version, > because situation has been changing in v4.13, v4.14 and now again in > v4.17-rc and stable kernels. Thanks for this summary. >> Being able to link to an authorative answer would be very appreciated. > > Sadly, there is no documentation at the level that you desire. Ah, I was calling the the answer I might get on this list the authoritative answer that I would link to :) Niklas