On Sun, 7 Dec 2008, Peter Schuller wrote: >> While you are talking about it: Does anyone know if the fsync blocks >> until the data is really stable on the device or if it simply returns >> when ZIL is disabled? >> >> In my understanding the topmost block would need to be written for the >> "commit" to be on disk. > > My understanding is that disabling the ZIL *will* break the semantics > of fsync(). > > The claim of "always consistent on disk" is not violated and is still > maintained, since consistency refers to ZFS' internal consistency. > > The tuning guide someone posts a link to later in this thread has > specific claims about this IIRC; such as NFS breaking (because > fsync-on-close semantics mandated by NFS, among other things, will not > be honored). And this would also apply to databases that rely on fsync() for ACID compliance, such as postgres, right?Received on Sun Dec 07 2008 - 11:41:19 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:38 UTC