Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!vector!egsner!mic!convex!convex.convex.com!thurlow From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: On the silliness of close() giving EDQUOT Message-ID: Date: 21 Oct 90 01:23:52 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: usenet@convex.com Lines: 15 In bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes: >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. This is exactly wrong; Sun ships a biod(8) daemon to support read-ahead and write-behind async I/O over NFS, and fsync() is certainly needed. #include Rob T -- Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com or thurlow%convex.com@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "This opinion was the only one available; I got here kind of late."