3 ms·
Yeah, I get it. The issue is that filesystems don't work like you've assumed. I outlined why this idea cannot work here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38
by throwaway09223 3y ago
Yeah, I get it. The issue is that filesystems don't work like you've assumed. I outlined why this idea cannot work here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38407472 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38407472
Again, manipulating links has nothing to do with file data.
- rcxdude 3y agoIt blatently can work, it's just not guaranteed by the standard (at least without an fsync). I don't think anyone is talking about situations where B is being actively written to while the rename happens.
- throwaway09223 3y agoThis is like saying sync() works. You can sync to durable storage at any point, yes. But you cannot do it in a semantically useful fashion. "I don't think anyone is talking about situations where B is being actively written to while the rename happens." Well, you specifically are ignoring this. I'm not. Filesystems are free to generate extra syncs whenever they like. You could even have a filesystem sync every single write operation to durable storage - why not?