Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: On the silliness of close() giving EDQUOT Message-ID: Date: 20 Oct 90 22:21:42 GMT References: <1990Oct18.200939.17427@athena.mit.edu> <24048:Oct1822:23:2090@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <9681:Oct2004:06:3090@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World Lines: 16 In-Reply-To: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu's message of 20 Oct 90 04:06:30 GMT From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) >I sympathize with what you're trying to say, but have you noticed that >fsync() isn't required to flush data over NFS, any more than write() is >required to return EDQUOT correctly? If write()'s errors aren't >accurate, I don't know how you expect fsync() to work. I assume by NFS you mean the NFS from Sun. Writes are always synchronous in NFS or must appear to be (or are non-compliant and you're on your own.) So fsync() for writes is a no-op and irrelevant in that case. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | {xylogics,uunet}!world!bzs | bzs@world.std.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD