From: Christophe Broult Date: 2002-01-19T06:11:56+09:00 Subject: RE: [RCR] #59 Add fsync method to IO class This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1A064.BECF3970 Content-Type: text/plain > -----Original Message----- > From: slumos@yahoo.com [mailto:slumos@yahoo.com] > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 3:59 PM > To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org > Subject: Re: [RCR] #59 Add fsync method to IO class > [...] > > > > We have to make up consensus about fdatasync. Choose one: > > > > (1) fsync and fdatasync; NOP if not exist > > (2) fsync and fdatasync; error if not exist > > (3) fsync only; NOP if not exist > > (4) fsync only; error if not exist > > (5) we don't need both > > > > I won't vote for 5; maybe I'm going to vote for 4. > > matz. > > I haven't used either of them, so my opinion is based on reading the > manpages and a healthy sense of paranoia. > > I want to say 4 unless/until somebody has a documented need for > fdatasync(), but that seems silly when the implementation is so easy > so I say 2. agreed so I say 2 also. BTW, do we want to setup a poll on Ruby garden to make it easier to keep count? Christophe > > Steve > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1A064.BECF3970 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [RCR] #59 Add fsync method to IO class

> -----Original Message-----
> From: slumos@yahoo.com [mailto:slumos@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 3:59 PM
> To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
> Subject: Re: [RCR] #59 Add fsync method to IO = class
>
[...]
> >
> > We have to make up consensus about = fdatasync.  Choose one:
> >
> >   (1) fsync and fdatasync; NOP = if not exist
> >   (2) fsync and fdatasync; error = if not exist
> >   (3) fsync only; NOP if not = exist
> >   (4) fsync only; error if not = exist
> >   (5) we don't need both
> >
> > I won't vote for 5; maybe I'm going to = vote for 4.
> >     =         =         =         =         =         =         matz.
>
> I haven't used either of them, so my opinion is = based on reading the
> manpages and a healthy sense of = paranoia.
>
> I want to say 4 unless/until somebody has a = documented need for
> fdatasync(), but that seems silly when the = implementation is so easy
> so I say 2.

agreed so I say 2 also.

BTW, do we want to setup a poll on Ruby garden to = make it easier to keep count?

Christophe
>
> Steve
>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C1A064.BECF3970--