Hi Doug,
> Hi Heiko: I think these calls to nc_sync have been there a long time.
> I don't recall the original reason for them. Before netcdf version
> 4.1 was nc_sync just a no-op? If this is the case, then maybe we should
> put in an AUTOSYNC option with the default = 0 (do not sync).
>
> If the netcdf group has ideas about the utility of nc_sync before netcdf
> version 4.1, then perhaps we should add the AUTOSYNC option with default =
> 1 (do sync).
>
> Another alternative would be to remove all calls to nc_sync and then make
> available and advertise a sync method in PDL::NetCDF.
>
> NetCDF group: Was nc_sync useful before netcdf version 4.1?
Not sure about how useful it was, but there were complaints about not
having a function in the netCDF API that called fsync(). See, for
example, this posting, and other parent postings in the same thread, if
you're interested in the discussion and use case leading up to adding
fsync() to nc_sync() unless configured with "--disable-fsync":
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/archives/netcdfgroup/2009/msg00411.html
It was added to version 4.1, released on 2010-01-30, after asking for
comments and tests of release candidates.
We welcome comments about whether the default is wrong and why. It
would be possible to change the upcoming 4.3.0 release to require
configuring with "--enable-fsync" to get the fsync() call in nc_sync(),
if there is a compelling reason why this would improve netCDF for most
users.
--Russ
> On Tue, 5 Mar 2013, Heiko Klein wrote:
>
> > Hi Doug,
> >
> > we just upgraded to Ubuntu Precise (12.04) and have for the first time a
> > netcdf version >= 4.1. With this upgrade PDL::NetCDF became awfully slow wh
> en
> > writing data, in particularly when writing small amounts of data.
> >
> > Reason for that is that netcdf now calls 'fsync' when nc_sync is called.
> > Syncing the complete filesystem is very costy and I don't really understand
>
> > why the netcdf-folks did that by default (it might make sense in some HPC
> > filesystems - and fsync is not available from FORTRAN). It can be disabled
> in
> > build-time, but who really does that - most people just don't use nc_sync,
> in
> > particular since 'close' does this automatically.
> >
> > But PDL::NetCDF calls nc_sync automatically after each put*. I would like t
> o
> > just remove the nc_sync calls from PDL::NetCDF, and let users call them
> > manually if they really need syncronisation. If you oppose to that, I would
>
> > like to put a flag to new: (AUTOSYNC => 0|1) (with default to 1). What do y
> ou
> > think?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Heiko
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Heiko Klein Tel. + 47 22 96 32 58
> > Development Section / IT Department Fax. + 47 22 69 63 55
> > Norwegian Meteorological Institute http://www.met.no
> > P.O. Box 43 Blindern 0313 Oslo NORWAY
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> netcdfgroup mailing list
> netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/m
> ailing_lists/
