不带fsync()的rename()是否安全? [英] Is rename() without fsync() safe?

问题描述

在不先调用fsync(tmppath_fd)的情况下调用rename(tmppath, path)是否安全?

Is it safe to call rename(tmppath, path) without calling fsync(tmppath_fd) first?

我希望路径始终指向完整的文件. 我主要关心 Ext4 .是否可以在以后的所有Linux内核版本中都保证reset()是安全的?

I want the path to always point to a complete file. I care mainly about Ext4. Is the rename() promised to be safe in all future Linux kernel versions?

Python中的用法示例:

A usage example in Python:

def store_atomically(path, data):
    tmppath = path + ".tmp"
    output = open(tmppath, "wb")
    output.write(data)

    output.flush()
    os.fsync(output.fileno())  # The needed fsync().
    output.close()
    os.rename(tmppath, path)

推荐答案

否.

查看libeatmydata，以及此演示文稿:

Look at libeatmydata, and this presentation:

http://www.oscon.com/oscon2008/public/schedule/detail/3172

来自MySql的Stewart Smith.

by Stewart Smith from MySql.

如果它离线/不再可用，我会保留一份副本:

In case it is offline/no longer available, I keep a copy of it:

• 视频此处
• 演示幻灯片(

• The video here
• The presentation slides (online version of slides)

这篇关于不带fsync()的rename()是否安全?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！