On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Charles Randall writes:
> >The qmail FAQ specifically recommends against soft updates for the mail
> >queue.
> >
> >http://cr.yp.to/qmail/faq/reliability.html#filesystems
> >
> >Is this incorrect?
>
> It seems to indicate that qmail doesn't use fsync(2) as much as
> it should do. If that is true, then yes, softupdates would mean
> that a lot of things which qmail (mistakenly) think has been
> written are in fact not on the disk.
If this is true, I guess qmail can be officially considered
broken. IIRC SMTP requires you to wait until the data is on
stable (non-volatile) storage until you are allowed to return
SMTP 250...
The system call used to guarantee this is fsync (and friends?);
if qmail doesn't use it but makes assumptions that aren't true
on any decent OS out there ...
regards,
Rik
--
Linux MM bugzilla: http://linux-mm.org/bugzilla.shtml
Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...
http://www.surriel.com/
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
