Re: fsync vs open_sync

>     There is also the fact that NTFS is a very slow filesystem, and
> Linux is
> a lot better than Windows for everything disk, caching and IO related. Try
> to copy some files in NTFS and in ReiserFS...

I'm not so sure I would agree with such a blanket generalization.  I find NTFS to be very fast, my main complaint is
fragmentationissues...I bet NTFS is better than ext3 at most things (I do agree with you about the cache, thoughO. 

I think in very general sense the open source stuff is higher quality but Microsoft benefits from a very tight vertical
integrationof the system.  They added ReadFileScatter and WriteFileScatter to the win32 api specifically to make SQL
Serverrun faster and SQL server is indeed very, very good at i/o. 

SQL Server keeps a one file database with blocks collected and written asynchronously.  It's a very tight system
becausethey have control over every layer of the system. 

Know your enemy.

That said, I think transaction based file I/O is 'the way' and if implemented on Reiser4 faster than I/O methodology
thanoffered on windows/ntfs.   

Merlin