Hi Thomas,
It *looks* like NC_sync (an internal function) could check a flag to
see if it should sync and then do so after writing header or numrec
data, or if variables were updated.
Rob
On Oct 28, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Thomas Orgis wrote:
Am Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:49:54 +0100
schrieb Thomas Orgis <Thomas.Orgis@xxxxxx>:
Main point of this discussion is the nc_fsync(), or any better named
function, to time actual data write action, and I would be happy if
it could make its way into a future NetCDF release.
After reflecting with Rob, I think an extra flag to nc_open to
modify the nc_sync() behaviour to include fsync() would be better
than introducing another function for this. I am not totally sure
now if nc_sync() should call fsync() only when it actually had dirty
data to write or always... Not sure how it is organized inside
NetCDF code (if nc_sync() is used a lot internally, for example)...
we need to make sure that any write since the last fsync() triggers
a call to fsync() on the next call to nc_sync().
Alrighty then,
Thomas.
