Richard Boulton wrote: > I can't think of a situation where it would be useful to do an fsync() > in which you don't want the data to be flushed as far as possible. If > you're bothering to call fsync(), it's presumably because you need to > guarantee that the data will be in a consistent state in the event of a > failure (like a power cut). So I think it would be helpful for an fsync > call in a high-level language to handle the details of this. But the file descriptor functions provided by the posix module are *not* high-level calls, and in fact, that is part of the point of the module. There is a noticeable performance penalty for waiting on F_FULLSYNC to complete, and a programmer who is already going outside of the normal mode of python file-handling (using file objects) should have a choice in the matter. -Scott -- Scott Dial scott at scottdial.com scodial at cs.indiana.edu
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4